AMD Radeon 8050S vs AMD Radeon PRO W7600 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 compare to the AMD Radeon 8050S in average benchmark score?

A: The Radeon PRO W7600 has an average benchmark score of 87,108, while the Radeon 8050S averages 62,108. This places the PRO W7600 in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 8050S in the 89th percentile.

Q: Which GPU wins in the Geekbench OpenCL test, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 81,528 versus 65,818 for the Radeon 8050S, a 23.9% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in the Geekbench Vulkan test between the two cards?

A: The Radeon PRO W7600 scores 92,688 in Vulkan, while the Radeon 8050S scores 58,398. This gives the PRO W7600 a 58.7% lead, its largest margin of victory in the recorded benchmarks.

Q: How do the TDP ratings differ between the two AMD GPUs?

A: The Radeon PRO W7600 has a TDP of 130 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W PSU. The Radeon 8050S has a TDP of 55 W, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed, reflecting its integrated design.

Q: What are the memory configurations for each GPU?

A: The Radeon PRO W7600 features 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 8050S uses system shared memory, with its bus width, type, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock, and what is the difference?

A: The Radeon 8050S has a higher boost clock at 2800 MHz, compared to 2440 MHz for the Radeon PRO W7600. However, the PRO W7600 has a higher base clock at 1720 MHz versus 1295 MHz.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a clear split based on workload type and platform. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins both head-to-head benchmarks, taking 2 wins to 0 for the Radeon 8050S. Its advantages are substantial in both OpenCL and Vulkan, with the Vulkan gap being nearly double the OpenCL gap.

The Radeon PRO W7600 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan APIs. Its OpenCL score of 81,528 puts it ahead of rivals like the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637, a 1.7% deficit) and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87,445, a 0.4% deficit). In Vulkan, its 92,688 score places it well above its nearest competitors listed in the database.

The Radeon 8050S, while losing both direct comparisons, still holds its own in the broader market. Its average score of 62,108 places it 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896) and only 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693). This suggests it is a capable performer within its integrated, low-power segment, even if it cannot match the dedicated PRO W7600.

For users prioritizing raw throughput in cross-platform graphics APIs, the PRO W7600 is the definitive winner. The 8050S, however, may be preferred in scenarios where its 55 W TDP and lack of external power connectors enable compact, portable system designs, as the data shows it operates without any dedicated power inputs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations within AMD's RDNA family. The Radeon PRO W7600 is built on RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. The Radeon 8050S uses RDNA 3.5 with the Strix Halo chip, and it belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The PRO W7600 uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the 8050S uses a 4 nm process, also at TSMC. Despite the smaller node, the 8050S has a larger die at 308 mm² compared to 204 mm² for the PRO W7600. Transistor counts are not directly comparable, as the PRO W7600 lists 13,300 million transistors with a density of 65.2M per mm², while the 8050S has no recorded transistor count or density figure.

Both GPUs share identical core configurations: 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 32 ray tracing cores. Neither has tensor cores listed. The API support is also identical, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 on both.

The memory architecture is a major divergence. The PRO W7600 uses dedicated GDDR6 memory, while the 8050S relies entirely on system shared memory. This fundamental difference affects bandwidth and capacity, with the PRO W7600 offering a fixed 288.0 GB/s, while the 8050S's bandwidth is system dependent.

The 8050S features a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the PRO W7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. This could impact data transfer rates in systems that support the newer standard, though the practical effect depends on the workload.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds show a clear trade-off. The PRO W7600 runs at 1720 MHz base and 2440 MHz boost, while the 8050S runs at 1295 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. The 8050S has the higher ceiling, but the PRO W7600 starts at a much higher floor.

Memory specifications are entirely different. The PRO W7600 has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The 8050S uses system shared memory with no fixed size, type, bus width, or bandwidth, all marked as system dependent.

Power requirements vary sharply. The PRO W7600 draws 130 W TDP, requires a 1x 6-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The 8050S has a 55 W TDP, uses no connectors, and has no PSU recommendation. The physical format also differs: the PRO W7600 is single-slot with dimensions of 241 mm length and 115 mm height, while the 8050S is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no listed dimensions.

Performance ceilings differ despite identical core counts. The PRO W7600 achieves 19.99 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.98 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The 8050S achieves 11.47 TFLOPS FP32 and 11.47 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). Pixel and texture rates follow a different pattern: the 8050S has higher rates at 179.2 GPixel/s and 358.4 GTexel/s, versus 156.2 GPixel/s and 312.3 GTexel/s for the PRO W7600.

Display outputs also differ. The PRO W7600 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the 8050S's outputs are portable device dependent. The release dates are also distinct, with the PRO W7600 launching on August 2, 2023, and the 8050S on January 5, 2025.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the Radeon PRO W7600 scoring 81,528 against 65,818 for the Radeon 8050S. This is a 23.9% delta in favor of the PRO W7600. In the context of the database, the PRO W7600 sits 0.4% below the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87,445) and 1.7% above the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637). The 8050S, by comparison, sits 0.3% above the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896) and 2.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775).

The Geekbench Vulkan test reveals a much larger gap. The PRO W7600 scores 92,688, while the 8050S scores 58,398, a 58.7% difference. This is the dominant margin in the head-to-head data. The PRO W7600's Vulkan score is notably higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting strong Vulkan optimization. The 8050S, conversely, scores lower in Vulkan than in OpenCL, indicating a relative weakness in that API.

The aggregate data reinforces the pattern. The PRO W7600 averages 87,108 across benchmarks, placing it in the 93rd percentile. The 8050S averages 62,108, placing it in the 89th percentile. The PRO W7600's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134, a 4.4% deficit) and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91,671, a 5% deficit), showing it competes near the upper mid-range. The 8050S's nearest rivals are all AMD products, with the Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896) being its closest match at 0.3% behind.

In terms of compute throughput, the PRO W7600 delivers 19.99 TFLOPS FP32, which is 74% higher than the 8050S's 11.47 TFLOPS. The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided: the PRO W7600's 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) is over three times the 8050S's 11.47 TFLOPS (1:1). The 8050S does win on pixel and texture rates, with 179.2 GPixel/s and 358.4 GTexel/s versus 156.2 GPixel/s and 312.3 GTexel/s, but these wins do not translate to benchmark victories.

The Verdict

The data directs different users toward different GPUs. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks by significant margins, offers dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with fixed 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and delivers nearly double the FP32 throughput of the 8050S. Its 93rd percentile ranking and proximity to the NVIDIA RTX A4500 series in the database confirm it as a strong contender for professional workloads.

The AMD Radeon 8050S, while losing both benchmarks, is not without merit. Its 55 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and integrated design point to a different use case entirely. It fits into systems where power efficiency and space are paramount, and its 89th percentile ranking shows it outperforms several dedicated GPUs in the database, including the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M. Its higher boost clock of 2800 MHz and superior pixel and texture rates could benefit certain rasterization-heavy tasks, even if the benchmark suite does not capture those advantages.

For professional users with dedicated GPU slots, the PRO W7600 is the obvious pick. Its benchmark lead is decisive, and its memory configuration removes reliance on system resources. For mobile or compact system builders, the 8050S offers a compelling integrated solution that avoids external power and delivers reasonable performance, but the recorded data shows it cannot match the PRO W7600 in cross-platform compute benchmarks. The choice ultimately depends on whether the workload demands maximum throughput or maximum flexibility in system design.