Radeon Vega 7 vs Pro W6600
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro W6600 with Radeon Vega 7, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6600 outperforms Vega 7 by a whopping 436% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 108 | 537 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 10 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 73.26 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 27.60 | 11.44 |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Navi 23 | Cezanne |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 8 June 2021 (3 years ago) | 13 April 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $649 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 1792 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 2331 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2903 MHz | 1900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 11,060 million | 9,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 325.1 | 53.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 10.4 TFLOPS | 1.702 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 8 |
| TMUs | 112 | 28 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | 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).
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | IGP |
| Length | 241 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 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 | GDDR6 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | 4x DisplayPort | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12.0 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
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 | 120−130
+422%
| 23
−422%
|
| 1440p | 130−140
+420%
| 25
−420%
|
| 4K | 80−85
+433%
| 15
−433%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 5.41 | no data |
| 1440p | 4.99 | no data |
| 4K | 8.11 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 18
+0%
|
18
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27
+0%
|
27
+0%
|
| Valorant | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24
+0%
|
24
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 15
+0%
|
15
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Valorant | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 58
+0%
|
58
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Valorant | 25
+0%
|
25
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Valorant | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
This is how Pro W6600 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:
- Pro W6600 is 422% faster in 1080p
- Pro W6600 is 420% faster in 1440p
- Pro W6600 is 433% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 50 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 38.27 | 7.14 |
| Recency | 8 June 2021 | 13 April 2021 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 45 Watt |
Pro W6600 has a 436% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 month.
Vega 7, on the other hand, has 122.2% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Pro W6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Vega 7 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro W6600 is a workstation card while Radeon Vega 7 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
