Radeon Pro W6600M vs GeForce GTX 970M

Place in the ranking	355	225
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	12.62	18.95
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	Navi 23
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	7 October 2014 (10 years ago)	8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,560.89	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 cores	1280	1792
Core clock speed	924 MHz	1224 MHz
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	2034 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	unknown	90 Watt
Texture fill rate	83.04	227.8
Floating-point processing power	2.657 TFLOPS	7.29 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	64
TMUs	80	112
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	28

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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	120 GB/s	224.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	Portable Device Dependent
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
BatteryBoost	+	-
Ansel	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	+	-

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.

GTX 970M 14.85

Pro W6600M 24.77
+66.8%

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.

GTX 970M 5710

Pro W6600M 9521
+66.7%

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:

900p	136 −61.8%	220−230 +61.8%
Full HD	56 −60.7%	90−95 +60.7%
1440p	25 −60%	40−45 +60%
4K	22 −59.1%	35−40 +59.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	45.73	no data
1440p	102.44	no data
4K	116.40	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −76.9%	45−50 +76.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −72.4%	50−55 +72.4%
Elden Ring	45−50 −80%	80−85 +80%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	46 −65.2%	75−80 +65.2%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −76.9%	45−50 +76.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −72.4%	50−55 +72.4%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −80%	100−110 +80%
Metro Exodus	41 −58.5%	65−70 +58.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −50%	50−55 +50%
Valorant	55−60 −69.5%	100−105 +69.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	46 −65.2%	75−80 +65.2%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −76.9%	45−50 +76.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −72.4%	50−55 +72.4%
Dota 2	33 −158%	85−90 +158%
Elden Ring	45−50 −80%	80−85 +80%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −38.2%	75−80 +38.2%
Fortnite	59 −110%	120−130 +110%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −80%	100−110 +80%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 −73.5%	85−90 +73.5%
Metro Exodus	29 −124%	65−70 +124%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	149 −4.7%	150−160 +4.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −50%	50−55 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 −81.8%	80−85 +81.8%
Valorant	55−60 −69.5%	100−105 +69.5%
World of Tanks	190−200 −33.2%	250−260 +33.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40 −90%	75−80 +90%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −76.9%	45−50 +76.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −72.4%	50−55 +72.4%
Dota 2	50−55 −60.4%	85−90 +60.4%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −38.2%	75−80 +38.2%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −80%	100−110 +80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	38 −311%	150−160 +311%
Valorant	55−60 −69.5%	100−105 +69.5%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	21−24 −95.2%	40−45 +95.2%
Elden Ring	21−24 −91.3%	40−45 +91.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 −90.9%	40−45 +90.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −33.6%	170−180 +33.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −76.9%	21−24 +76.9%
World of Tanks	100−110 −57.7%	160−170 +57.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27 −85.2%	50−55 +85.2%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −61.5%	21−24 +61.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 −90.9%	21−24 +90.9%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −100%	70−75 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −83.3%	65−70 +83.3%
Metro Exodus	25 −124%	55−60 +124%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −89.5%	35−40 +89.5%
Valorant	35−40 −81.1%	65−70 +81.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −120%	21−24 +120%
Dota 2	33 −30.3%	40−45 +30.3%
Elden Ring	10−11 −100%	20−22 +100%
Grand Theft Auto V	33 −30.3%	40−45 +30.3%
Metro Exodus	7 −171%	18−20 +171%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	38 −100%	75−80 +100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −60%	16−18 +60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	33 −30.3%	40−45 +30.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	13 −100%	24−27 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −120%	21−24 +120%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Dota 2	24−27 −65.4%	40−45 +65.4%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −73.7%	30−35 +73.7%
Fortnite	15 −107%	30−35 +107%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −81%	35−40 +81%
Valorant	16−18 −100%	30−35 +100%

This is how GTX 970M and Pro W6600M compete in popular games:

Pro W6600M is 62% faster in 900p
Pro W6600M is 61% faster in 1080p
Pro W6600M is 60% faster in 1440p
Pro W6600M is 59% faster in 4K

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro W6600M is 311% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Pro W6600M surpassed GTX 970M in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.85	24.77
Recency	7 October 2014	8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm

Pro W6600M has a 66.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6600M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 970M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 970M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro W6600M is a mobile workstation one.

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