Radeon Pro W6800 vs A10G

Place in the ranking	66	52
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	23.18
Power efficiency	22.36	14.18
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2024)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GA102	Navi 21
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	12 April 2021 (3 years ago)	8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$2,249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	9216	3840
Core clock speed	1320 MHz	2075 MHz
Boost clock speed	1710 MHz	2320 MHz
Number of transistors	28,300 million	26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	492.5	556.8
Floating-point processing power	31.52 TFLOPS	17.82 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	96
TMUs	288	240
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	72	60

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	8-pin EPS	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1563 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	600.2 GB/s	512.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

6x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.6	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.2	1.2
CUDA	8.6	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A10G 48.53

Pro W6800 51.30
+5.7%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

A10G 18723

Pro W6800 19791
+5.7%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	140−150 −10.7%	155 +10.7%
1440p	120−130 −12.5%	135 +12.5%
4K	85−90 −8.2%	92 +8.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	14.51
1440p	no data	16.66
4K	no data	24.45

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

95−100

+0%

95−100

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Battlefield 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +0%	100−105 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Hitman 3	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Metro Exodus	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Battlefield 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +0%	100−105 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Hitman 3	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Metro Exodus	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	277 +0%	277 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +0%	100−105 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Hitman 3	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	225 +0%	225 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	268 +0%	268 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	157 +0%	157 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

100−110

+0%

100−110

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	260−270 +0%	260−270 +0%
Hitman 3	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	179 +0%	179 +0%
Metro Exodus	55 +0%	55 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	212 +0%	212 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

85−90

+0%

85−90

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Hitman 3	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	99 +0%	99 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	126 +0%	126 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50

+0%

45−50

+0%

This is how A10G and Pro W6800 compete in popular games:

Pro W6800 is 11% faster in 1080p
Pro W6800 is 13% faster in 1440p
Pro W6800 is 8% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	48.53	51.30
Recency	12 April 2021	8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	8 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	250 Watt

A10G has 66.7% lower power consumption.

Pro W6800, on the other hand, has a 5.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 month, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A10G and Radeon Pro W6800.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.