Radeon RX 6600M vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with Radeon RX 6600M, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018, $899
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
35.48
+7.9%

RTX 4000 outperforms 6600M by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking161182
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.85no data
Power efficiency17.2725.60
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTU104Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date13 November 2018 (7 years ago)31 May 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores23041792
Core clock speed1005 MHz2068 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHz2416 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate222.5270.6
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS8.659 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs144112
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores3628
L0 Cacheno data448 KB
L1 Cache2.3 MB512 KB
L2 Cache4 MB2 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s224.0 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 Connectors3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-CNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

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.

RTX 4000 35.48
+7.9%
RX 6600M 32.87

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.

RTX 4000 14845
+7.9%
Samples: 2795
RX 6600M 13753
Samples: 1054

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 HD100−110
+0%
100
1440p55−60
+1.9%
54
4K30−35
+0%
30

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.99no data
1440p16.35no data
4K29.97no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 164 164
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 107 107

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 114 114
Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 83 83
Far Cry 5 116 116
Fortnite 150−160 150−160
Forza Horizon 4 202 202
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
Valorant 200−210 200−210

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 67 67
Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 69 69
Dota 2 114 114
Far Cry 5 108 108
Far Cry 6 84 84
Fortnite 150−160 150−160
Forza Horizon 4 199 199
Grand Theft Auto V 116 116
Metro Exodus 80 80
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 142 142
Valorant 200−210 200−210

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 61 61
Dota 2 104 104
Far Cry 5 101 101
Forza Horizon 4 168 168
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85 85
Valorant 144 144

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 80−85 80−85
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240 230−240
Far Cry 6 64 64
Grand Theft Auto V 61 61
Metro Exodus 47 47
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 240−250 240−250

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90 85−90
Cyberpunk 2077 39 39
Far Cry 5 90 90
Forza Horizon 4 128 128
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62 62

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 85−90 85−90

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30 27−30
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Far Cry 6 9 9
Grand Theft Auto V 58 58
Metro Exodus 28 28
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44 44
Valorant 200−210 200−210

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55 50−55
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 19 19
Dota 2 80 80
Far Cry 5 44 44
Forza Horizon 4 74 74
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 40−45

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 40−45

This is how RTX 4000 and RX 6600M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 is 2% faster in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.48 32.87
Recency 13 November 2018 31 May 2021
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 100 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 8% higher aggregate performance score.

RX 6600M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42% more advanced lithography process, and 38% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro RTX 4000 and Radeon RX 6600M.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600M is a notebook 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.


3.6 542 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1132 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or Radeon RX 6600M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.