Radeon Pro W6600 vs ATI Mobility HD 560v
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 560v with Radeon Pro W6600, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6600 outperforms Mobility HD 560v by a whopping 4321% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1202 | 156 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 25.70 |
| Power efficiency | 4.16 | 27.57 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | M96 | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 5 May 2010 (15 years ago) | 8 June 2021 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $649 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 320 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 2331 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2903 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 514 million | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 17.60 | 325.1 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.352 TFLOPS | 10.4 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 64 |
| TMUs | 32 | 112 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 448 KB |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 32 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 size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 241 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 224.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12.0 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−4233%
|
260−270
+4233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−4275%
|
350−400
+4275%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−4233%
|
1300−1350
+4233%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−4218%
|
950−1000
+4218%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−4131%
|
550−600
+4131%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−4233%
|
260−270
+4233%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−4275%
|
350−400
+4275%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−4233%
|
260−270
+4233%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−4233%
|
1300−1350
+4233%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−4131%
|
550−600
+4131%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−4233%
|
260−270
+4233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−4275%
|
350−400
+4275%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−4233%
|
260−270
+4233%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−4233%
|
1300−1350
+4233%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−4233%
|
130−140
+4233%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
−4300%
|
220−230
+4300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−3789%
|
350−400
+3789%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−3900%
|
40−45
+3900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−4186%
|
600−650
+4186%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−4150%
|
170−180
+4150%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−4150%
|
85−90
+4150%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.81 | 35.81 |
| Recency | 5 May 2010 | 8 June 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 100 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 560v has 567% lower power consumption.
Pro W6600, on the other hand, has a 4321% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 686% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro W6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 560v in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 560v is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro W6600 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
