Radeon Pro W6600M vs Pro 5600M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 5600M and Radeon Pro W6600M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Pro 5600M
2020
8 GB HBM2, 50 Watt
24.02

Pro W6600M outperforms Pro 5600M by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking243201
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency32.9322.84
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 12Navi 23
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date15 June 2020 (4 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)

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 cores25601792
Core clock speed1000 MHz1224 MHz
Boost clock speed1030 MHz2034 MHz
Number of transistorsno data11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rate164.8227.8
Floating-point processing power5.274 TFLOPS7.29 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs160112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed770 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth394.2 GB/s224.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.21.3

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.

Pro 5600M 24.02
Pro W6600M 29.98
+24.8%

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.

Pro 5600M 9232
Pro W6600M 11524
+24.8%

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
−29.5%
75−80
+29.5%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−32.6%
55−60
+32.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
−29.2%
60−65
+29.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
−29.5%
75−80
+29.5%
Battlefield 5 90−95
−18.9%
100−110
+18.9%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−32.6%
55−60
+32.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
−29.2%
60−65
+29.2%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−22.7%
90−95
+22.7%
Fortnite 110−120
−16.8%
130−140
+16.8%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−22.2%
110−120
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
−26.6%
80−85
+26.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
−27.6%
110−120
+27.6%
Valorant 150−160
−15.2%
180−190
+15.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 60−65
−29.5%
75−80
+29.5%
Battlefield 5 90−95
−18.9%
100−110
+18.9%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−32.6%
55−60
+32.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
−8%
270−280
+8%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
−29.2%
60−65
+29.2%
Dota 2 110−120
−10.2%
130−140
+10.2%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−22.7%
90−95
+22.7%
Fortnite 110−120
−16.8%
130−140
+16.8%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−22.2%
110−120
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
−26.6%
80−85
+26.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
−20.5%
100−105
+20.5%
Metro Exodus 45−50
−28.6%
60−65
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
−27.6%
110−120
+27.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−33.3%
85−90
+33.3%
Valorant 150−160
−15.2%
180−190
+15.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−18.9%
100−110
+18.9%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−32.6%
55−60
+32.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
−29.2%
60−65
+29.2%
Dota 2 110−120
−10.2%
130−140
+10.2%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−22.7%
90−95
+22.7%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−22.2%
110−120
+22.2%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
−26.6%
80−85
+26.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
−27.6%
110−120
+27.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−33.3%
85−90
+33.3%
Valorant 150−160
−15.2%
180−190
+15.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
−16.8%
130−140
+16.8%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
−21.9%
190−200
+21.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−32.5%
50−55
+32.5%
Metro Exodus 30−33
−30%
35−40
+30%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
−11.6%
220−230
+11.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−20.6%
75−80
+20.6%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−17.4%
27−30
+17.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−31.8%
27−30
+31.8%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−27.5%
65−70
+27.5%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−27.6%
70−75
+27.6%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−29.7%
45−50
+29.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
−30.2%
65−70
+30.2%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
−22.2%
21−24
+22.2%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−31.7%
50−55
+31.7%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−27.3%
40−45
+27.3%
Valorant 130−140
−28.5%
160−170
+28.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−26.5%
40−45
+26.5%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Dota 2 75−80
−17.3%
85−90
+17.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−32%
30−35
+32%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−33.3%
27−30
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−34.8%
30−35
+34.8%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
−33.3%
30−35
+33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro W6600M is 44% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro W6600M is ahead in 65 tests (97%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.02 29.98
Recency 15 June 2020 8 June 2021
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 90 Watt

Pro 5600M has 80% lower power consumption.

Pro W6600M, on the other hand, has a 24.8% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 11 months.

The Radeon Pro W6600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 5600M in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro 5600M
Radeon Pro 5600M
AMD Radeon Pro W6600M
Radeon Pro W6600M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 79 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro 5600M or Radeon Pro W6600M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.