Radeon PRO W6300 vs Pro WX Vega M GL

Place in the ranking	404	366
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	13.14	39.81
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	Navi 24
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	24 April 2018 (6 years ago)	19 January 2022 (3 years ago)

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	1280	768
Core clock speed	931 MHz	1512 MHz
Boost clock speed	1011 MHz	2040 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	80.88	97.92
Floating-point processing power	2.588 TFLOPS	3.133 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	80	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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	medium sized	no data
Interface	IGP	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	HBM2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	32 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	64 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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 WX Vega M GL 11.84

PRO W6300 13.80
+16.6%

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 WX Vega M GL 4768

PRO W6300 5559
+16.6%

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	55 −9.1%	60−65 +9.1%
1440p	8 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
4K	18 +0%	18−21 +0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −14.3%	24−27 +14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −12.5%	45−50 +12.5%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −14.3%	24−27 +14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −10%	55−60 +10%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −12.9%	35−40 +12.9%
Valorant	45−50 −12.2%	55−60 +12.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −12.5%	45−50 +12.5%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −14.3%	24−27 +14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Dota 2	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −14.6%	55−60 +14.6%
Fortnite	70−75 −12.7%	80−85 +12.7%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −10%	55−60 +10%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	123 −13.8%	140−150 +13.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −12.9%	35−40 +12.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
Valorant	45−50 −12.2%	55−60 +12.2%
World of Tanks	160−170 −12.4%	190−200 +12.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −12.5%	45−50 +12.5%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −14.3%	24−27 +14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Dota 2	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −14.6%	55−60 +14.6%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −10%	55−60 +10%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	31 −12.9%	35−40 +12.9%
Valorant	45−50 −12.2%	55−60 +12.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90−95 −6.4%	100−105 +6.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
World of Tanks	85−90 −13.6%	100−105 +13.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −3.4%	30−33 +3.4%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Valorant	30−35 −12.9%	35−40 +12.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	34 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Fortnite	14−16 −14.3%	16−18 +14.3%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Valorant	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%

This is how Pro WX Vega M GL and PRO W6300 compete in popular games:

PRO W6300 is 9% faster in 1080p
PRO W6300 is 13% faster in 1440p
A tie in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.84	13.80
Recency	24 April 2018	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	25 Watt

Pro WX Vega M GL has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

PRO W6300, on the other hand, has a 16.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 160% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX Vega M GL is a mobile workstation card while Radeon PRO W6300 is a workstation one.

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