CMP 40HX vs PRO W6800 for Blender
Compare CMP 40HX 8 GB and PRO W6800 32 GB for Blender Cycles. See benchmark performance, VRAM, power ratings and checked prices side by side. PRO W6800 32 GB leads the Blender benchmark score by 66.2%.
Fastest in Cycles
PRO W6800 32 GB
66% faster than CMP 40HX 8 GB
Most VRAM
PRO W6800 32 GB
300% more VRAM than CMP 40HX 8 GB
Lowest power draw
CMP 40HX 8 GB
26% lower rating than PRO W6800 32 GB
Cheapest
Cannot compare
Price unavailable for some GPUs
Best value for money
Cannot compare
Price or benchmark unavailable for some GPUs
GPU comparison
Key specifications for Blender rendering.
| Spec | CMP 40HX 8 GB | PRO W6800 32 GB |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest price | Price unavailable No current offer matches your preferences. | $1,649.96 Checked Oct 9, 2026 |
| Value for money | N/A | 1.18 |
| Blender benchmark score | 1,170.87 | 1,946.06 +66% |
| VRAM | 8 GB Meets Blender’s recommended VRAM | 32 GB More capacity for heavy scenes+300% |
| System PSU | 450 W Secondary source suggestion−25% | 600 W Secondary source suggestion |
| Render support | CUDA, OpenCL | OpenCL |
| Performance | ||
| CUDA cores | 2,304 | N/A |
| Boost clock | 1650 MHz | 2322 MHz +41% |
| RT cores | 36 | 60 +67% |
| Tensor cores | 288 | N/A |
| Memory | ||
| Memory bandwidth | 448 GB/s | 512 GB/s +14% |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory bus | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| Platform | ||
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| TDP | 185 W −26% | 250 W |
| Release year | 2021 | 2021 |
Blender Cycles benchmarks
Estimated seconds / frame Lower is faster
CMP 40HX 8 GB
Blender 4.4.0 · OptiX · 5 runs
PRO W6800 32 GB
Blender 4.0.0 · HIP · 8 runs
Junkshop
Monster
Classroom
Which GPU should you choose for Blender?
PRO W6800 32 GB is the stronger Blender rendering pick here based on benchmark score.
Cycles rendering performance
PRO W6800 32 GB leads by 66.2% in the Renderjuice Blender benchmark model (1,946 vs 1,171). For render-time-first decisions, that is the card to prioritize.
VRAM and scene capacity
PRO W6800 32 GB has more scene headroom with 32 GB of VRAM versus 8 GB on CMP 40HX 8 GB. That matters most for large environments, dense geometry, high-resolution textures, and less optimized production files.
Power ratings and cooling
CMP 40HX 8 GB is the lower-power option at 185 W TDP, compared with 250 W for PRO W6800 32 GB. If render speed is close, that can make CMP 40HX 8 GB easier to cool and run quietly.
Is the upgrade worthwhile?
PRO W6800 32 GB is the straightforward performance pick, while CMP 40HX 8 GB needs a price, power, availability, or compatibility advantage to make more sense.
Comparison summary
PRO W6800 32 GB leads the Blender benchmark score by 66.2%.
Fastest in Cycles: PRO W6800 32 GB 66% faster than CMP 40HX 8 GB.
Most VRAM: PRO W6800 32 GB 300% more VRAM than CMP 40HX 8 GB.
Lowest power draw: CMP 40HX 8 GB 26% lower rating than PRO W6800 32 GB.
Cheapest: Cannot compare Price unavailable for some GPUs.
Best value for money: Cannot compare Price or benchmark unavailable for some GPUs.
CMP 40HX 8 GB has 8 GB of VRAM, while PRO W6800 32 GB has 32 GB, which matters when scenes, textures, or geometry get heavier.
If you are deciding between these cards for Blender, focus first on Blender benchmark score, VRAM capacity, memory bandwidth, and whether your scenes are likely to benefit more from raw speed or extra memory headroom. The comparison table above keeps those tradeoffs in one place.