Arc A550M vs Radeon Pro W6800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro W6800 with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

Pro W6800
2021
32 GB GDDR6, 250 Watt
51.30
+109%

Pro W6800 outperforms Arc A550M by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking52223
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation23.31no data
Power efficiency14.3128.56
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameNavi 21DG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 June 2021 (3 years ago)2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,249 no data

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 cores38402048
Core clock speed2075 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed2320 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors26,800 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate556.8262.4
Floating-point processing power17.82 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
TMUs240128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Cores6016

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
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. 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.

Pro W6800 51.30
+109%
Arc A550M 24.57

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Pro W6800 27937
+94.7%
Arc A550M 14350

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 HD155
+121%
70−75
−121%
1440p135
+125%
60−65
−125%
4K92
+130%
40−45
−130%

Cost per frame, $

1080p14.51no data
1440p16.66no data
4K24.45no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+144%
35−40
−144%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+108%
50−55
−108%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+120%
40−45
−120%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+110%
75−80
−110%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+104%
45−50
−104%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+144%
35−40
−144%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+87.3%
55−60
−87.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+98.4%
60−65
−98.4%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+52.5%
140−150
−52.5%
Hitman 3 100−110
+127%
45−50
−127%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+81.1%
110−120
−81.1%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+79.3%
80−85
−79.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+74.2%
60−65
−74.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 200−210
+150%
80−85
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+41.6%
100−110
−41.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+108%
50−55
−108%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+120%
40−45
−120%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+110%
75−80
−110%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+104%
45−50
−104%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+144%
35−40
−144%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+87.3%
55−60
−87.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+98.4%
60−65
−98.4%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+52.5%
140−150
−52.5%
Hitman 3 100−110
+127%
45−50
−127%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+81.1%
110−120
−81.1%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+79.3%
80−85
−79.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+74.2%
60−65
−74.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 277
+246%
80−85
−246%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+104%
50−55
−104%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+41.6%
100−110
−41.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+108%
50−55
−108%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+120%
40−45
−120%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+104%
45−50
−104%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+144%
35−40
−144%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+87.3%
55−60
−87.3%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+52.5%
140−150
−52.5%
Hitman 3 100−110
+127%
45−50
−127%
Horizon Zero Dawn 225
+103%
110−120
−103%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 268
+235%
80−85
−235%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 157
+202%
50−55
−202%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+41.6%
100−110
−41.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+74.2%
60−65
−74.2%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+136%
45−50
−136%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+122%
35−40
−122%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+132%
24−27
−132%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+165%
21−24
−165%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+126%
27−30
−126%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+213%
14−16
−213%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+114%
27−30
−114%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+91.9%
130−140
−91.9%
Hitman 3 70−75
+154%
27−30
−154%
Horizon Zero Dawn 179
+265%
45−50
−265%
Metro Exodus 55
+22.2%
45−50
−22.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 212
+316%
50−55
−316%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+186%
27−30
−186%
Watch Dogs: Legion 220−230
+61.8%
130−140
−61.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+123%
40−45
−123%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+139%
21−24
−139%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+161%
18−20
−161%
Hitman 3 40−45
+126%
18−20
−126%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220
+70.7%
120−130
−70.7%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+167%
27−30
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+281%
24−27
−281%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+177%
12−14
−177%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+169%
12−14
−169%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+154%
12−14
−154%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+130%
30−35
−130%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 126
+334%
27−30
−334%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+164%
10−12
−164%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+133%
21−24
−133%

This is how Pro W6800 and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 121% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 125% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 130% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro W6800 is 334% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Pro W6800 surpassed Arc A550M in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 51.30 24.57
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 60 Watt

Pro W6800 has a 108.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 316.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A550M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W6800 is a workstation card while Arc A550M is a notebook one.


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

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 W6800
Radeon Pro W6800
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 81 vote

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 75 votes

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.