Radeon Pro W6600 vs Quadro P4000 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro P4000 Mobile with Radeon Pro W6600, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6600 outperforms P4000 Mobile by an impressive 93% 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 | 328 | 156 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.16 | 25.70 |
| Power efficiency | 14.31 | 27.57 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GP104 | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 11 January 2017 (9 years ago) | 8 June 2021 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $819.61 | $649 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Pro W6600 has 713% better value for money than P4000 Mobile.
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 | 1792 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 1227 MHz | 2331 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | 2903 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,200 million | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 137.4 | 325.1 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.398 TFLOPS | 10.4 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 112 | 112 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 448 KB |
| L1 Cache | 672 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 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 | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1502 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192 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 |
| Display Port | 1.4 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | - |
| 3D Stereo | + | no data |
| Mosaic | + | no data |
| nView Display Management | + | no data |
| Optimus | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2 |
| CUDA | 6.1 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.59 | 35.81 |
| Recency | 11 January 2017 | 8 June 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 7 nm |
Pro W6600 has a 93% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 129% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro W6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P4000 Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro P4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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.
