Radeon Pro W6600M vs Quadro P2000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 Mobile and Radeon Pro W6600M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

P2000 Mobile
2019
3.75 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
16.03

Pro W6600M outperforms P2000 Mobile by an impressive 54% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking330219
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency15.2219.52
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGP106Navi 23
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date15 February 2019 (5 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)

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 cores11521792
Core clock speed1291 MHz1224 MHz
Boost clock speed1291 MHz2034 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rate92.95227.8
Floating-point processing power2.974 TFLOPS7.29 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs72112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3.75 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/s224.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.21.3
CUDA6.1-

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 Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Hitman 3 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Hitman 3 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Hitman 3 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.03 24.67
Recency 15 February 2019 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 3.75 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 90 Watt

P2000 Mobile has 20% lower power consumption.

Pro W6600M, on the other hand, has a 53.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 113.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2000 Mobile in performance tests.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
Quadro P2000 Mobile
AMD Radeon Pro W6600M
Radeon Pro W6600M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 105 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.