Radeon Pro W6600 vs Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q

Place in the ranking	170	106
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	72.09
Power efficiency	28.13	27.69
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU104	Navi 23
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$649

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	2560	1792
Core clock speed	780 MHz	2331 MHz
Boost clock speed	1380 MHz	2903 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	220.8	325.1
Floating-point processing power	7.066 TFLOPS	10.4 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	160	112
Tensor Cores	320	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	40	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
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	416.0 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	4x DisplayPort
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 32.61

Pro W6600 40.13
+23.1%

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.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 12539

Pro W6600 15430
+23.1%

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 HD	88 −13.6%	100−110 +13.6%
1440p	46 −19.6%	55−60 +19.6%
4K	56 −16.1%	65−70 +16.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	6.49
1440p	no data	11.80
4K	no data	9.98

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −17.6%	80−85 +17.6%
Elden Ring	110−120 −17.1%	130−140 +17.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −18.3%	110−120 +18.3%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −17.6%	80−85 +17.6%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −19.2%	180−190 +19.2%
Metro Exodus	80−85 −17.3%	95−100 +17.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −19.4%	80−85 +19.4%
Valorant	130−140 −15.4%	150−160 +15.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −18.3%	110−120 +18.3%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −17.6%	80−85 +17.6%
Dota 2	36 −11.1%	40−45 +11.1%
Elden Ring	110−120 −17.1%	130−140 +17.1%
Far Cry 5	66 −21.2%	80−85 +21.2%
Fortnite	150−160 −19.2%	180−190 +19.2%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −19.2%	180−190 +19.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	100−110 −22.6%	130−140 +22.6%
Metro Exodus	80−85 −17.3%	95−100 +17.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −19.6%	220−230 +19.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −19.4%	80−85 +19.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 −17.1%	130−140 +17.1%
Valorant	130−140 −15.4%	150−160 +15.4%
World of Tanks	270−280 −8.3%	300−310 +8.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −18.3%	110−120 +18.3%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −17.2%	75−80 +17.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −17.6%	80−85 +17.6%
Dota 2	101 −18.8%	120−130 +18.8%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −12.4%	100−105 +12.4%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −19.2%	180−190 +19.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −19.6%	220−230 +19.6%
Valorant	130−140 −15.4%	150−160 +15.4%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	55−60 −20.7%	70−75 +20.7%
Elden Ring	60−65 −21%	75−80 +21%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −20.7%	70−75 +20.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −20%	210−220 +20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −12.9%	35−40 +12.9%
World of Tanks	200−210 −19.6%	250−260 +19.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −19%	75−80 +19%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
Far Cry 5	100−110 −17.6%	120−130 +17.6%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −22.2%	110−120 +22.2%
Metro Exodus	70−75 −16.4%	85−90 +16.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −15.4%	60−65 +15.4%
Valorant	95−100 −15.8%	110−120 +15.8%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Dota 2	60−65 −16.7%	70−75 +16.7%
Elden Ring	27−30 −20.7%	35−40 +20.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65 −16.7%	70−75 +16.7%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −17.6%	120−130 +17.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −14.3%	24−27 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 −16.7%	70−75 +16.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −11.1%	40−45 +11.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Dota 2	65 −15.4%	75−80 +15.4%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −22.2%	55−60 +22.2%
Fortnite	40−45 −16.3%	50−55 +16.3%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −15.4%	60−65 +15.4%
Valorant	45−50 −14.6%	55−60 +14.6%

This is how RTX 4000 Max-Q and Pro W6600 compete in popular games:

Pro W6600 is 14% faster in 1080p
Pro W6600 is 20% faster in 1440p
Pro W6600 is 16% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	32.61	40.13
Recency	27 May 2019	8 June 2021
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	100 Watt

RTX 4000 Max-Q has 25% lower power consumption.

Pro W6600, on the other hand, has a 23.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Pro W6600 is a workstation one.

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