AMD Radeon RX 6600M vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 6600M and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 6600M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- 2.5x more core clock speed: 1489 MHz vs 600 MHz
- Around 56% higher boost clock speed: 2105 MHz vs 1350 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 12 nm
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 13907 vs 13081
- Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 721 vs 540
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8612 vs 3717
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8006 vs 3357
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8612 vs 3717
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8006 vs 3357
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2021 vs 27 May 2019 |
Core clock speed | 1489 MHz vs 600 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 2105 MHz vs 1350 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 12 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13907 vs 13081 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 721 vs 540 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8612 vs 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8006 vs 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8612 vs 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8006 vs 3357 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
- Around 10% higher texture fill rate: 259.2 GTexel/s vs 235.8 GTexel/s
- Around 71% higher pipelines: 3072 vs 1792
- Around 88% lower typical power consumption: 80 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 8 GB
- Around 28% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 84400 vs 66084
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 19377 vs 14178
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 19377 vs 14178
- 5.3x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 7879 vs 1500
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 259.2 GTexel/s vs 235.8 GTexel/s |
Pipelines | 3072 vs 1792 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 8 GB |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 84400 vs 66084 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19377 vs 14178 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19377 vs 14178 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 7879 vs 1500 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 6600M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon RX 6600M | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13907 | 13081 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 721 | 540 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 66084 | 84400 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14178 | 19377 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8612 | 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8006 | 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14178 | 19377 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8612 | 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8006 | 3357 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1500 | 7879 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon RX 6600M | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Turing |
Code name | Navi 23 | TU104 |
Launch date | 2021 | 27 May 2019 |
Place in performance rating | 170 | 169 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 2105 MHz | 1350 MHz |
Compute units | 28 | |
Core clock speed | 1489 MHz | 600 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 471.5 GFLOPS (1:16) | 259.2 GFLOPS |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 15.09 TFLOPS (2:1) | 16.59 TFLOPS |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 7.544 TFLOPS | 8.294 TFLOPS |
Pipelines | 1792 | 3072 |
Pixel fill rate | 134.7 GPixel/s | 86.40 GPixel/s |
Texture fill rate | 235.8 GTexel/s | 259.2 GTexel/s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt | 80 Watt |
Transistor count | 11060 million | 13600 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Width | IGP | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | |
OpenCL | 2.1 | 1.2 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 16 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 256 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 128 bit | |
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | |
Memory type | GDDR6 |