AMD Radeon 780M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7500 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 780M and AMD Radeon PRO W7500 are both RDNA 3.0 parts, but they target completely different segments of the market. The data is unambiguous: the discrete PRO W7500 wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the FACT PACK, often by enormous margins. However, the 780M is an integrated GPU with a unique role, and its performance profile relative to its power envelope tells a different story. The verdict is clear: for raw compute and graphics throughput, the PRO W7500 is in another league, while the 780M exists to provide surprisingly capable graphics within the constraints of an APU.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon PRO W7500 is the overwhelming winner in every measured category. In the two head-to-head benchmarks available, it crushes the 780M. In Geekbench OpenCL, the PRO W7500 scores 58,213 against the 780M's 18,602, a delta of -68% from the 780M's perspective. In Geekbench Vulkan, the PRO W7500 hits 68,634 versus the 780M's 33,683, a -50.9% delta. These are not marginal victories; they represent a fundamental performance tier difference.

The 780M's wins are not in raw scores but in efficiency and form factor. As an IGP with a 15 W TDP, it delivers its performance without any power connectors and with a slot width of "IGP," meaning it occupies no expansion slot. The PRO W7500, by contrast, is a single-slot card with a 70 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The 780M's memory bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning it shares system memory, while the PRO W7500 has dedicated 8 GB of GDDR6 with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. For a system builder needing a compact, low-power solution, the 780M is the only choice; for anyone needing dedicated graphics performance, the PRO W7500 is the clear victor.

The PRO W7500 also wins on feature set for professional use. It has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, whereas the 780M's display outputs are "Motherboard Dependent." This makes the PRO W7500 a more versatile tool for multi-monitor professional workstations. The 780M's only advantage in the data is its transistor density: at 142.6M / mm² on a 4 nm node, it is significantly denser than the PRO W7500's 65.2M / mm² on a 6 nm node. This is a manufacturing achievement, not a performance metric.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 3.0 architecture, but they are implemented very differently. The 780M uses the Phoenix chip, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish," on a 6 nm process, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The 780M's smaller die and higher transistor count result in a much higher density (142.6M / mm² vs 65.2M / mm²), but the PRO W7500's larger die allows for more specialized hardware.

The compute units are drastically different. The 780M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The PRO W7500 more than doubles those numbers: 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 12 on the 780M versus 28 on the PRO W7500. This explains the massive performance gap in compute-heavy workloads. The PRO W7500's FP32 throughput is 12.19 TFLOPS versus the 780M's 8.909 TFLOPS, and in FP16 the gap widens: 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 8.909 TFLOPS (1:1). The PRO W7500's FP16 capability is over 2.7 times higher, indicating a design more suited to certain professional and AI-adjacent workloads.

Clock speeds tell an interesting story. The 780M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost of 2900 MHz, while the PRO W7500 has a base of 1500 MHz and a boost of only 1700 MHz. The 780M's high boost clock partially compensates for its fewer cores, but the PRO W7500's superior core count and memory subsystem win out. The PRO W7500 also has a dedicated memory controller for its 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the 780M relies entirely on system memory with bandwidth that is "System Dependent." This is a critical architectural difference: the PRO W7500's 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth is fixed and predictable, whereas the 780M's performance varies with the host system's RAM.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two head-to-head tests in the FACT PACK are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In Geekbench OpenCL, the PRO W7500 scores 58,213 versus the 780M's 18,602. The delta of -68% for the 780M means the PRO W7500 is roughly 3.13 times faster. This is a decisive win for the discrete card, reflecting its 2.33 times more shading units and dedicated memory bandwidth.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows slightly but remains enormous. The PRO W7500 scores 68,634 versus the 780M's 33,683, a delta of -50.9% for the 780M. The PRO W7500 is about 2.04 times faster. Vulkan's lower overhead may benefit the 780M's integrated design, but the PRO W7500 still nearly doubles the score. The pattern is consistent: the PRO W7500 wins both tests by a wide margin, and the 780M's best result is still less than half of the PRO W7500's worst result in these tests.

The 780M's average benchmark score is 17,588, which places it at the 61st percentile of all GPUs. The PRO W7500's average is 16,415, placing it at the 59th percentile. This is a fascinating anomaly: despite losing both head-to-head tests, the 780M has a higher average score and percentile. This is likely due to the different benchmark sets included in each product's average. The 780M's benchmarks include 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (480) and Geekbench tests, while the PRO W7500's set includes many Passmark tests, some of which are very low (e.g., Passmark DirectX 12 at 46). The PRO W7500's Passmark G3D score of 13,368 is substantial, but its G2D score of 1,174 and various DirectX legacy scores drag down its average. The 780M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (delta -0.3%) and AMD Radeon Pro 560 (delta 0.2%), while the PRO W7500's rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (delta 0%) and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (delta 0.3%). This shows the 780M punches above its weight class, while the PRO W7500 is firmly in the mid-range professional segment.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is decisively faster, scoring 58,213 versus the Radeon 780M's 18,602. This represents a -68% delta for the 780M, meaning the PRO W7500 is over three times faster.

Q: Does the Radeon 780M ever beat the PRO W7500 in any benchmark?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests provided (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the PRO W7500 wins both. The 780M has zero wins in the head-to-head data.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The 780M uses "System Shared" memory with "System Dependent" bandwidth, meaning it relies on the host's RAM. The PRO W7500 has dedicated 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with a fixed 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The 780M has a TDP of 15 W and requires no power connectors. The PRO W7500 has a 70 W TDP, also requires no power connectors, but has a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The PRO W7500 has 1,792 shading units, compared to the 780M's 768. The PRO W7500 also has 112 TMUs and 64 ROPs versus 48 TMUs and 32 ROPs on the 780M.

Q: Why does the 780M have a higher average benchmark score than the PRO W7500?

A: The 780M's average benchmark score is 17,588 versus the PRO W7500's 16,415. This is despite the PRO W7500 winning all head-to-head tests. The discrepancy stems from different benchmark sets: the 780M's set includes a 3DMark result and Geekbench tests, while the PRO W7500's set includes numerous Passmark tests, some of which have very low scores (e.g., 46 in DirectX 12).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 780M | AMD Radeon PRO W7500 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Phoenix | Navi 33 (Hotpink Bonefish) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 142.6M / mm² | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz | 1700 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 1,792 |

| TMUs | 48 | 112 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 12 | 28 |

| Pixel Rate | 92.80 GPixel/s | 108.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 139.2 GTexel/s | 190.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 8.909 TFLOPS | 12.19 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.909 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Release Date | 2024-01-30 | 2023-08-02 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 429 USD |

The Verdict

The data dictates a clear split. For anyone building a system with a dedicated graphics card, the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is the only viable choice between these two. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 68% and 50.9%, respectively. Its 1,792 shading units, 28 RT cores, and 256.0 GB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth provide a level of performance the 780M cannot approach. The PRO W7500's 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.37 TFLOPS FP16 throughput make it a far more capable compute device. Its four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and single-slot design are professional workstation features.

The Radeon 780M's case rests entirely on its integration and efficiency. With a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and an IGP slot width, it is designed for compact, low-power systems. Its 4 nm process and 2900 MHz boost clock are impressive engineering feats, and its 61st percentile ranking against all GPUs is remarkable for an integrated part. The 780M's higher average benchmark score (17,588 vs 16,415) and better percentile (61 vs 59) than the PRO W7500 are noteworthy, but these are artifacts of different benchmark suites and do not reflect real-world head-to-head performance. The 780M is the right choice only when a discrete GPU is impossible or undesirable. For any workload where graphics performance matters, the PRO W7500 is the definitive winner based on the available data.