AMD Radeon 760M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7400 Comparison

AMD has positioned both the Radeon 760M and the Radeon PRO W7400 within its RDNA 3.0 architecture, but the two parts serve fundamentally different roles. The 760M is a Phoenix integrated processor, while the W7400 is a discrete Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) card. The recorded data shows a clear split in how these products are designed, measured, and deployed. The 760M has a complete set of benchmark scores, while the W7400 has no recorded benchmark entries in the database, which directly limits direct comparison. The analysis below relies only on the specification differences and the recorded performance data for the 760M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 760M wins in the category of integrated graphics flexibility. Its memory is listed as "System Shared," meaning it draws on the host system's RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This design makes it suitable for compact or power-limited systems where a separate graphics card is not an option. The 760M holds a 35th percentile ranking among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6019. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (average score 6001, delta of 0.3%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (average score 6000, delta of 0.3%). The data indicates the 760M sits in a tight cluster with these products, showing performance within a fraction of a percent.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in raw computational throughput based on its specifications. It delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS. The W7400 also has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, all of which exceed the 760M's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The W7400 has a pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s, versus the 760M's 41.58 GPixel/s and 83.17 GTexel/s. In every measured throughput metric, the W7400 holds a decisive advantage. The W7400 also has a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, above the 760M's 35th percentile.

The 760M wins in the category of power efficiency. Its thermal design power is 15 W, while the W7400 is rated at 55 W. The 760M is an IGP with no power connectors, whereas the W7400 is a single-slot card with no power connectors but a suggested PSU of 250 W. The 760M also uses a smaller 4 nm process node, while the W7400 uses a 6 nm node. The 760M has a higher transistor density of 142.6M per mm², compared to the W7400's 65.2M per mm². For systems where thermal and power budgets are constrained, the 760M's design is the clear winner.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the RDNA 3.0 architecture but diverge in nearly every physical implementation detail. The 760M uses the Phoenix chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The 760M achieves a transistor density of 142.6M per mm², while the W7400 has only 65.2M per mm². Despite the smaller die, the 760M packs more transistors, which reflects the denser integration of an IGP.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The 760M operates at a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz. The W7400 has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. The 760M's higher boost clock partially compensates for its lower shader count, but the W7400's larger execution resources still produce higher overall throughput. The W7400 has 28 ray tracing cores, compared to the 760M's 8. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory architecture is a major divider. The 760M uses system shared memory with a bus width listed as "System Shared" and bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with a bandwidth of 172.8 GB/s. The memory clock for the W7400 is 1350 MHz, which translates to 10.8 Gbps effective. The 760M has no dedicated memory clock, relying entirely on the host system's RAM. This difference means the W7400 offers predictable, fixed memory performance, while the 760M's memory bandwidth varies with the system configuration.

The bus interface is identical: both use PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs differ, with the 760M being "Motherboard Dependent" and the W7400 offering 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The W7400 has physical dimensions of 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the 760M has no recorded dimensions due to its IGP nature. The W7400 is single-slot, while the 760M has a slot width of "IGP." The 760M has no power connectors, and the W7400 also has no power connectors, but the W7400 suggests a 250 W PSU.

The Verdict

The data shows that the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the superior choice for tasks requiring high sustained compute throughput. Its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores provide more than 50% higher FP32 performance than the 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS. The W7400 also has dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, which is a fixed resource, unlike the 760M's system-dependent memory. For professional workloads where rendering, compute, or multi-display output is needed, the W7400's specifications clearly align with those demands.

The AMD Radeon 760M is the appropriate choice for systems where the GPU must be integrated into the processor. Its 15 W TDP, 4 nm process, and IGP form factor make it compatible with thin, light, or low-power systems. The 760M's benchmark scores, including a 20255 in Geekbench OpenCL and 30336 in Geekbench Vulkan, show it can handle general graphics tasks. Its average benchmark score of 6019 and 35th percentile ranking place it near the AMD Radeon RX 6400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, both of which have average scores around 6000. The 760M is not a replacement for a discrete card like the W7400, but the data indicates it serves a distinct market segment.

Neither product has a launch MSRP listed in the database, so no price comparison is possible. The W7400 has no benchmark scores recorded, which means its performance cannot be directly validated against the 760M's measured results. The 760M has a release date of January 30, 2024, while the W7400 has a release date of August 2, 2025. The 760M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, and the W7400's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega. Both are currently Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon 760M has 5.323 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Does the Radeon 760M have dedicated memory?

A: No, the Radeon 760M uses "System Shared" memory with a bus width and bandwidth described as "System Shared" and "System Dependent," meaning it relies on the host system's RAM.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the Radeon PRO W7400?

A: The W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 172.8 GB/s and a memory clock of 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective).

Q: How do the ray tracing cores compare?

A: The Radeon PRO W7400 has 28 ray tracing cores, while the Radeon 760M has 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Are there benchmark scores for the Radeon PRO W7400?

A: The database lists no benchmark scores for the Radeon PRO W7400, with an average benchmark score of 0. The Radeon 760M has multiple recorded scores, including a Passmark G3D score of 5310.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon 760M and the AMD Radeon PRO W7400. The headToHeadBenchmarks field is empty, and the winsA and winsB counts are both zero. The only measurable performance data belongs to the 760M. Its benchmark scores include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 20255, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 30336. The Passmark suite shows a DirectX 10 score of 19, DirectX 11 score of 52, DirectX 12 score of 25, and DirectX 9 score of 65. The Passmark G2D score is 890, the G3D score is 5310, and the GPU Compute score is 2840.

The 760M's average benchmark score of 6019 places it at the 35th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6400, has an average score of 6001, a delta of 0.3%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M also has an average score of 6000, a delta of 0.3%. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server has an average score of 5996, a delta of 0.4%. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 has an average score of 6049, a delta of -0.5%. These deltas show the 760M performs within half a percent of all four listed rivals.

For the W7400, the absence of benchmark data means no direct comparison can be made using recorded scores. The W7400's percentile ranking of 50 versus the 760M's 35 is the only aggregate indicator. The W7400's specification advantage in shading units (1792 vs 512), TMUs (112 vs 32), and ROPs (64 vs 16) suggests it would outperform the 760M in raw throughput, but this is not confirmed by any benchmark score in the database. The pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s for the W7400 are higher than the 760M's 41.58 GPixel/s and 83.17 GTexel/s, but these are calculated specifications, not measured results.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in the following recorded fields:

• Chip: The 760M uses Phoenix, while the W7400 uses Navi 33.
• Codename: The 760M has no codename listed, while the W7400 has "Hotpink Bonefish."
• Generation: The 760M is from Navi III IGP (Phoenix), while the W7400 is from Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series).
• Process Node: The 760M is on 4 nm, the W7400 is on 6 nm.
• Transistors: The 760M has 25,390 million, the W7400 has 13,300 million.
• Die Size: The 760M is 178 mm², the W7400 is 204 mm².
• Transistor Density: The 760M has 142.6M per mm², the W7400 has 65.2M per mm².
• Base Clock: The 760M is 800 MHz, the W7400 is 330 MHz.
• Boost Clock: The 760M is 2599 MHz, the W7400 is 1100 MHz.
• Memory Clock: The 760M is "System Shared," the W7400 is 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: The 760M is "System Shared," the W7400 is 8 GB.
• Memory Type: The 760M is "System Shared," the W7400 is GDDR6.
• Memory Bus Width: The 760M is "System Shared," the W7400 is 128 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: The 760M is "System Dependent," the W7400 is 172.8 GB/s.
• Shading Units: The 760M has 512, the W7400 has 1792.
• TMUs: The 760M has 32, the W7400 has 112.
• ROPs: The 760M has 16, the W7400 has 64.
• RT Cores: The 760M has 8, the W7400 has 28.
• Pixel Rate: The 760M is 41.58 GPixel/s, the W7400 is 70.40 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: The 760M is 83.17 GTexel/s, the W7400 is 123.2 GTexel/s.
• FP32: The 760M is 5.323 TFLOPS, the W7400 is 7.885 TFLOPS.
• FP16: The 760M is 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1), the W7400 is 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: The 760M is 15 W, the W7400 is 55 W.
• Slot Width: The 760M is "IGP," the W7400 is "Single-slot."
• Suggested PSU: The 760M has none listed, the W7400 is 250 W.
• Display Outputs: The 760M is "Motherboard Dependent," the W7400 is 4x DisplayPort 2.1.
• Dimensions: The 760M has none listed, the W7400 is 168 mm (length), 69 mm (height), 20 mm (width).
• Release Date: The 760M is January 30, 2024, the W7400 is August 2, 2025.
• Predecessor: The 760M is Navi II IGP, the W7400 is Radeon Pro Vega.
• Percentile vs All GPUs: The 760M is 35, the W7400 is 50.
• Average Benchmark Score: The 760M is 6019, the W7400 is 0.