AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance advantage for the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation. While the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has no benchmark scores in the database, the NVIDIA card delivers a measured average benchmark score of 184,664, placing it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD card, by contrast, holds only the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero, indicating no recorded data rather than a literal lack of capability.

The NVIDIA card's two recorded results are strong. It scores 175,286 in Geekbench OpenCL and 194,041 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Vulkan result is notably higher, suggesting the architecture scales well across different compute APIs. The average of these two figures, 184,664, confirms consistency between the two workloads.

Comparing the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation to its nearest rivals provides context for its standing. It sits 0.5% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB, which averages 183,725. It trails the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB by 1.3%, that card averaging 187,147. Against the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 1.4% ahead, with the Blackwell card averaging 182,109. The largest gap among the listed rivals is versus the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 D, where the RTX 5000 Ada Generation leads by 3.7%, that card averaging 178,050.

The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has no rival data and no head-to-head comparisons in the database. As such, no direct score-to-score comparison can be made from the recorded measurements. What can be stated is the percentile gap: the NVIDIA card sits at the 98th percentile, the AMD card at the 50th. That difference of 48 percentile points is the clearest quantitative separator available in the data.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation wins on every measured axis in the database. Its 65.28 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is 2.63 times the AMD card's 24.82 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output matches its FP32 at 65.28 TFLOPS, again 2.63 times the AMD figure of 24.82 TFLOPS. The pixel rate of 448.8 GPixel/s is 2.31 times the AMD card's 193.9 GPixel/s. The texture rate of 1,020.0 GTexel/s is 2.63 times the AMD card's 387.8 GTexel/s.

The AMD card's wins are limited to areas outside raw compute. It uses a newer PCIe interface, PCIe 5.0 x16, versus the NVIDIA card's PCIe 4.0 x16. It also supports DisplayPort 2.1a on its single display output, whereas the NVIDIA card provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The AMD card is physically smaller at 241 mm in length versus 267 mm, and it is thinner at 19 mm width versus a null width entry for NVIDIA. It draws less power, 150 W versus 250 W, and carries a lower suggested power supply rating, 450 W versus 600 W.

For compute-heavy tasks, the database clearly favors the NVIDIA card. For density-constrained or power-limited installations, the AMD card presents a lighter, single-slot, lower-power option. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot, which is a meaningful physical difference for chassis planning.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different design generations and foundry nodes. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation uses the AD102 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The AMD card belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation, while the NVIDIA card is part of the Workstation Ada generation within the GeForce 50-series family.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The NVIDIA chip packs 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die, yielding a density of 125.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD chip carries 53,900 million transistors on a much smaller 357 mm² die, giving it a higher density of 151.0 million per square millimeter. The AMD card achieves greater transistor density despite the smaller die, a direct result of the tighter 4 nm process.

Core counts reveal the scale of the NVIDIA advantage. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 12,800 shading units, 400 texture mapping units, 176 render output units, 100 ray tracing cores, and 400 tensor cores. The AMD card has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 48 ray tracing cores, with no tensor core count listed. The NVIDIA card has no tensor core equivalent on the AMD side, which is a structural difference for AI workloads. The shading unit ratio is 4.17 to 1 in NVIDIA's favor, the TMU ratio is 2.08 to 1, and the ROP ratio is 1.83 to 1.

Both cards use 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Clock behavior differs: the AMD card's base clock is 1080 MHz with a boost of 2020 MHz and a game clock of 1080 MHz. The NVIDIA card's base clock is 1155 MHz with a boost of 2550 MHz and no game clock listed. Memory clock is identical at 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective.

API support is the same for both: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use a single 16-pin power connector. The NVIDIA card was released earlier, on 2023-08-08, while the AMD card's release date is 2025-12-10. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and its successor is Blackwell PRO W. The AMD card's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, with no successor listed.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion for compute performance: the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation is the stronger card by every recorded benchmark and specification metric. Its average benchmark score of 184,664 versus no recorded score for the AMD card, its 98th versus 50th percentile standing, and its 65.28 TFLOPS FP32 output all confirm this. The NVIDIA card also brings 400 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely, making it the only option in this comparison with dedicated AI acceleration hardware.

The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has specific advantages in the physical and interface domains. It is a single-slot card, 241 mm long and 19 mm wide, versus the NVIDIA card's dual-slot, 267 mm length. It draws 150 W versus 250 W, and its suggested power supply is 450 W versus 600 W. It uses PCIe 5.0 x16, a newer bus standard than the NVIDIA card's PCIe 4.0 x16. It also offers DisplayPort 2.1a, a newer display standard, though only on a single output.

For a user prioritizing raw compute, tensor performance, and benchmark standing, the NVIDIA card is the clear selection from the recorded data. For a user prioritizing low power draw, single-slot physical footprint, or the newest PCIe and display interfaces, the AMD card has documented advantages. Neither card has a launch MSRP in the database, so no pricing comparison is possible.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 184,664. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has no recorded benchmark scores, with an average score of zero.

Q: How do the two cards compare in FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA card delivers 65.28 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 2.63 times the AMD card's 24.82 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both have 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective.

Q: Which card has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation has 400 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has no tensor core count listed in the database.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD card has a TDP of 150 W with a suggested power supply of 450 W. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 250 W with a suggested power supply of 600 W.

Q: Which card uses a newer PCIe interface?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Q: How does the NVIDIA card compare to the GeForce RTX 4090 D?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada Generation averages 184,664, which is 3.7% ahead of the GeForce RTX 4090 D's average of 178,050.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D | NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 53,900 million | 76,300 million |

| Die Size | 357 mm² | 609 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 151.0M / mm² | 125.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1080 MHz | 1155 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2020 MHz | 2550 MHz |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 12800 |

| TMUs | 192 | 400 |

| ROPs | 96 | 176 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 48 | 100 |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 400 |

| Pixel Rate | 193.9 GPixel/s | 448.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 387.8 GTexel/s | 1,020.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 24.82 TFLOPS | 65.28 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 24.82 TFLOPS (1:1) | 65.28 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DisplayPort 2.1a | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | 241 mm | 267 mm |

| Height | 111 mm | 112 mm |

| Width | 19 mm | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2025-12-10 | 2023-08-08 |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) | Workstation Ada |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Workstation Ampere |

| Successor | Not listed | Blackwell PRO W |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 98 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 184,664 |