Radeon Pro W6400 vs Pro W6800

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro W6800 and Radeon Pro W6400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Pro W6800
2021
32 GB GDDR6, 250 Watt
51.43
+147%

Pro W6800 outperforms Pro W6400 by a whopping 147% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking53264
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation23.64no data
Power efficiency14.0928.53
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 21Navi 24
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date8 June 2021 (3 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,249 no data

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 cores3840768
Core clock speed2075 MHz2331 MHz
Boost clock speed2320 MHz2331 MHz
Number of transistors26,800 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate556.8111.9
Floating-point processing power17.82 TFLOPS3.58 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs24048
Ray Tracing Cores6012

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 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s112.0 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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort2x DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.2
Vulkan1.21.3

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.

Pro W6800 51.43
+147%
Pro W6400 20.83

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.

Pro W6800 19814
+147%
Pro W6400 8027

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 HD155
+158%
60−65
−158%
1440p133
+166%
50−55
−166%
4K99
+148%
40−45
−148%

Cost per frame, $

1080p14.51no data
1440p16.91no data
4K22.72no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+171%
35−40
−171%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+170%
40−45
−170%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+157%
35−40
−157%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+152%
65−70
−152%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+150%
40−45
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+171%
35−40
−171%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+158%
40−45
−158%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+150%
50−55
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+153%
85−90
−153%
Hitman 3 100−110
+173%
40−45
−173%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+151%
80−85
−151%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+167%
55−60
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+170%
40−45
−170%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 200−210
+150%
80−85
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+160%
55−60
−160%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+170%
40−45
−170%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+157%
35−40
−157%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+152%
65−70
−152%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+150%
40−45
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+171%
35−40
−171%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+158%
40−45
−158%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+150%
50−55
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+153%
85−90
−153%
Hitman 3 100−110
+173%
40−45
−173%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+151%
80−85
−151%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+167%
55−60
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+170%
40−45
−170%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 277
+152%
110−120
−152%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+165%
40−45
−165%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+160%
55−60
−160%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+170%
40−45
−170%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+157%
35−40
−157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+150%
40−45
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+171%
35−40
−171%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+158%
40−45
−158%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+153%
85−90
−153%
Hitman 3 100−110
+173%
40−45
−173%
Horizon Zero Dawn 225
+150%
90−95
−150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 268
+168%
100−105
−168%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 157
+162%
60−65
−162%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+160%
55−60
−160%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+170%
40−45
−170%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+165%
40−45
−165%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+167%
30−33
−167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+176%
21−24
−176%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+154%
24−27
−154%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+154%
24−27
−154%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+161%
18−20
−161%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+150%
24−27
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+161%
100−105
−161%
Hitman 3 70−75
+163%
27−30
−163%
Horizon Zero Dawn 179
+156%
70−75
−156%
Metro Exodus 55
+162%
21−24
−162%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 212
+149%
85−90
−149%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+177%
30−33
−177%
Watch Dogs: Legion 220−230
+159%
85−90
−159%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+154%
35−40
−154%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+162%
21−24
−162%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+161%
18−20
−161%
Hitman 3 40−45
+169%
16−18
−169%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220
+147%
85−90
−147%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+167%
27−30
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+148%
40−45
−148%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+157%
14−16
−157%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+175%
12−14
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+153%
30−33
−153%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 126
+152%
50−55
−152%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+190%
10−11
−190%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+172%
18−20
−172%

This is how Pro W6800 and Pro W6400 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 158% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 166% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 148% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 51.43 20.83
Recency 8 June 2021 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 50 Watt

Pro W6800 has a 146.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro W6400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 months, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro W6400 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.


AMD Radeon Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800
AMD Radeon Pro W6400
Radeon Pro W6400

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.


3.9 82 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 28 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6400 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.