Radeon Pro W6600M vs HD 6930

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6930 with Radeon Pro W6600M, including specs and performance data.

HD 6930
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 186 Watt
6.70

Pro W6600M outperforms HD 6930 by a whopping 283% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking556216
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.99no data
Power efficiency2.6721.13
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameCaymanNavi 23
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date1 December 2011 (13 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$180 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores12801792
Core clock speed750 MHz1224 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2034 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)186 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rate60.00227.8
Floating-point processing power1.92 TFLOPS7.29 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs80112
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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length220 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1200 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth153.6 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.70 25.64
Recency 1 December 2011 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 186 Watt 90 Watt

Pro W6600M has a 282.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 106.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W6600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6930 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6930 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro W6600M is a mobile workstation one.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 6930
Radeon HD 6930
AMD Radeon Pro W6600M
Radeon Pro W6600M

Other comparisons

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.


3.9 66 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6930 or Radeon Pro W6600M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.