Radeon RX 6600 vs Pro WX 8200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 8200 with Radeon RX 6600, including specs and performance data.

Pro WX 8200
2018, $999
8 GB HBM2, 230 Watt
29.81

RX 6600 outperforms Pro 8200 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking221157
Place by popularitynot in top-10022
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.7449.78
Power efficiency10.1021.21
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameVega 10Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date13 August 2018 (8 years ago)13 October 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 6600 has 639% better value for money than Pro WX 8200.

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 cores35841792
Core clock speed1200 MHz1626 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz2491 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt132 Watt
Texture fill rate336.0279.0
Floating-point processing power10.75 TFLOPS8.928 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs224112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28
L0 Cacheno data448 KB
L1 Cache896 KB512 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mm190 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.1251.2

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.

Pro WX 8200 29.81
RX 6600 35.95
+20.6%

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 WX 8200 12474
Samples: 110
RX 6600 15042
+20.6%
Samples: 15820

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 HD85−90
−17.5%
103
1440p40−4553
+32.5%
4K24−2730
+25%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.753.19
+72.8%
1440p24.986.21
+75.1%
4K41.6310.97
+73.7%
  • RX 6600 has 73% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 6600 has 75% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 6600 has 74% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 169 169
Counter-Strike 2 345 345
Cyberpunk 2077 107 107

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 120 120
Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 303 303
Cyberpunk 2077 91 91
Far Cry 5 154 154
Fortnite 160−170 160−170
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150 140−150
Valorant 220−230 220−230

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 70 70
Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 146 146
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 73 73
Dota 2 150 150
Far Cry 5 142 142
Far Cry 6 121 121
Fortnite 160−170 160−170
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
Grand Theft Auto V 137 137
Metro Exodus 82 82
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150 140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 147 147
Valorant 220−230 220−230

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 59 59
Dota 2 107 107
Far Cry 5 134 134
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150 140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90 90
Valorant 220−230 220−230

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 160−170 160−170

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 85 85
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260 250−260
Far Cry 6 59 59
Grand Theft Auto V 64 64
Metro Exodus 48 48
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 250−260 250−260

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100 95−100
Cyberpunk 2077 34 34
Far Cry 5 91 91
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70 65−70

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 95−100 95−100

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30 27−30
Counter-Strike 2 20 20
Far Cry 6 10 10
Grand Theft Auto V 60 60
Metro Exodus 29 29
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44 44
Valorant 220−230 220−230

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60 55−60
Counter-Strike 2 40−45 40−45
Cyberpunk 2077 14 14
Dota 2 85 85
Far Cry 5 44 44
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50 45−50

4K
Epic

Fortnite 45−50 45−50

This is how Pro WX 8200 and RX 6600 compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 is 21% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 is 33% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6600 is 25% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.81 35.95
Recency 13 August 2018 13 October 2021
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 132 Watt

RX 6600 has a 21% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 43% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 8200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 8200 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600 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.


4.2 29 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 13563 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro WX 8200 or Radeon RX 6600, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.