Radeon R7 265 vs Pro W6600X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro W6600X with Radeon R7 265, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6600X outperforms R7 265 by a whopping 224% 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 | 198 | 492 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 20.18 | 4.72 |
| Power efficiency | 20.06 | 4.95 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | Navi 23 | Pitcairn |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 3 August 2021 (4 years ago) | 13 February 2014 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $699 | $149 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Pro W6600X has 328% better value for money than R7 265.
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 | 2048 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 2068 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2479 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 11,060 million | 2,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 317.3 | 59.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 10.15 TFLOPS | 1.894 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128 | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | no data |
| L0 Cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 512 KB |
| L3 Cache | 32 MB | no data |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 210 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1 x 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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 179.2 GB/s |
| 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 | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | - | + |
| FreeSync | - | + |
| DDMA audio | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | - |
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 | 31.35 | 9.67 |
| Recency | 3 August 2021 | 13 February 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 150 Watt |
Pro W6600X has a 224.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Pro W6600X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 265 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro W6600X is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 265 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
