Radeon RX 6600 XT vs FirePro S10000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S10000 with Radeon RX 6600 XT, including specs and performance data.

S10000
2012, $3,599
6 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
10.84

6600 XT outperforms S10000 by a whopping 263% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking482131
Place by popularitynot in top-10058
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.2548.59
Power efficiency2.2519.13
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTahitiNavi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date12 November 2012 (13 years ago)30 July 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 $379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RX 6600 XT has 19336% better value for money than S10000.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores4096 ×22048
Core clock speed825 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHz2589 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate106.4 ×2331.4
Floating-point processing power3.405 TFLOPS ×210.6 TFLOPS
ROPs32 ×264
TMUs112 ×2128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cache448 KB512 KB
L2 Cache768 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 MB

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length305 mm190 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB ×28 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit ×2128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth480 GB/s ×2256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI-+
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

S10000 10.84
RX 6600 XT 39.30
+263%

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.

S10000 4537
Samples: 8
RX 6600 XT 16443
+262%
Samples: 7127

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 HD30−35
−75.8%
124
1440p18−2068
+278%
4K10−1240
+300%

Cost per frame, $

1080p119.973.06
+97.5%
1440p199.945.57
+97.2%
4K359.909.48
+97.4%
  • RX 6600 XT has 97% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT has 97% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 6600 XT has 97% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 210−220 210−220
Cyberpunk 2077 79 79
Resident Evil 4 Remake 100−110 100−110

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 120−130 120−130
Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 210−220 210−220
Cyberpunk 2077 78 78
Far Cry 5 151 151
Fortnite 170−180 170−180
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160 150−160
Valorant 230−240 230−240

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 120−130 120−130
Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 210−220 210−220
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 76 76
Dota 2 170 170
Far Cry 5 141 141
Fortnite 170−180 170−180
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 150−160
Grand Theft Auto V 135 135
Metro Exodus 95 95
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160 150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 176 176
Valorant 230−240 230−240

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 69 69
Dota 2 120 120
Far Cry 5 133 133
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160 150−160
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99 99
Valorant 230−240 230−240

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180 170−180

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 100−110 100−110
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280−290 280−290
Grand Theft Auto V 68 68
Metro Exodus 56 56
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 270−280 270−280

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110 100−110
Cyberpunk 2077 40 40
Far Cry 5 105 105
Forza Horizon 4 110−120 110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80 75−80

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110 100−110

4K
High

Atomic Heart 30−35 30−35
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 45−50
Grand Theft Auto V 64 64
Metro Exodus 34 34
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54 54
Valorant 240−250 240−250

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65 60−65
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 14 14
Dota 2 86 86
Far Cry 5 51 51
Forza Horizon 4 75−80 75−80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60 55−60

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55 50−55

This is how S10000 and RX 6600 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 XT is 313% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 278% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6600 XT is 300% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.84 39.30
Recency 12 November 2012 30 July 2021
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 160 Watt

RX 6600 XT has a 263% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 33% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 79% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro S10000 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S10000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600 XT is a desktop one.

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.


3 40 votes

Rate FirePro S10000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 5652 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S10000 or Radeon RX 6600 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.