Radeon RX 6600 XT vs Pro WX 8200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

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

Pro WX 8200
2018, $999
8 GB HBM2, 230 Watt
29.75
RX 6600 XT
2021, $379
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
39.23
+31.9%

6600 XT outperforms Pro 8200 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking224131
Place by popularitynot in top-10088
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.6047.17
Power efficiency10.0819.12
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2019)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameVega 10Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date13 August 2018 (8 years ago)30 July 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 6600 XT has 615% 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 cores35842048
Core clock speed1200 MHz1968 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz2589 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate336.0331.4
Floating-point processing power10.75 TFLOPS10.6 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs224128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 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 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s256.0 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, 2x 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 29.75
RX 6600 XT 39.23
+31.9%

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 XT 16446
+31.8%
Samples: 7223

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 HD90−95
−27.4%
124
1440p50−5568
+36%
4K30−3540
+33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.103.06
+72.5%
1440p19.985.57
+72.1%
4K33.309.48
+71.5%
  • RX 6600 XT has 72% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT has 72% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 6600 XT has 72% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 210−220 210−220
Cyberpunk 2077 79 79
Hogwarts Legacy 90−95 90−95
Resident Evil 4 Remake 100−110 100−110

Full HD
Medium

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
Hogwarts Legacy 90−95 90−95
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160 150−160
Valorant 230−240 230−240

Full HD
High

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
Hogwarts Legacy 90−95 90−95
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
Hogwarts Legacy 90−95 90−95
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
Hogwarts Legacy 45−50 45−50
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80 75−80

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110 100−110

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50 45−50
Grand Theft Auto V 64 64
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27 24−27
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
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27 24−27
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60 55−60

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55 50−55

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

  • RX 6600 XT is 38% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6600 XT is 36% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6600 XT is 33% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 29.75 39.23
Recency 13 August 2018 30 July 2021
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 160 Watt

RX 6600 XT has a 32% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 30% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6600 XT 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 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.


4.2 29 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 5657 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 Radeon Pro WX 8200 or Radeon RX 6600 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.