AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs AMD Radeon Pro W5500X Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 occupy completely different tiers of the professional graphics stack, and the data supports very distinct use cases for each. The W5500X is an end-of-life, Apple MPX form factor card built for the 2019 Mac Pro ecosystem, while the R9700 is an active, PCIe 5.0 x16 workstation card designed for compute and AI workloads. From the recorded benchmarks, the R9700 is the clear performance leader in raw compute, with an OpenCL score of 118,202 and a Vulkan score of 63,550, but it also carries a significantly higher launch MSRP of 1,299 USD. The W5500X, with its launch MSRP of 599 USD, targets users who specifically need a dual-slot, Apple MPX card with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory for macOS-based workflows. The R9700, by contrast, offers 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, a 256 bit bus, and 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 2.9 times the bandwidth of the W5500X. For compute-heavy tasks, the R9700 is the only rational choice, as its FP32 throughput of 47.84 TFLOPS dwarfs the W5500X's 5.398 TFLOPS. However, the W5500X does hold a higher percentile ranking in the database at 73 compared to the R9700's 69, which is a reflection of its Metal benchmark score of 27,973 versus the R9700's average benchmark score of 23,315. The W5500X also edges out its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti, by a negligible 0.2 percent delta. The R9700's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M290X, which it beats by 0.2 percent, a comparatively small margin for a modern card. In summary, the W5500X is for legacy Mac Pro users who need a specific form factor and moderate compute, while the R9700 is for professionals running modern compute, AI, and high-resolution workloads that demand massive memory and bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are separated by four full generations of AMD GPU architecture. The W5500X is built on the Navi 14 chip using RDNA 1.0, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 40.5 million per mm². The R9700, on the other hand, uses the Navi 48 chip with RDNA 4.0, also from TSMC but on a 4 nm node. This newer process allows for 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, achieving a density of 151.0 million per mm². That is a massive jump in density, more than 3.7 times the W5500X's figure, which directly enables the R9700's higher core counts and clock speeds. The W5500X has 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The R9700 more than doubles each of these, with 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The R9700 also introduces 64 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the W5500X. Clock speeds are another major differentiator: the W5500X runs at a base of 1187 MHz and boosts to 1757 MHz, while the R9700 has a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2350 MHz, and a boost clock of 2920 MHz. The memory subsystems are equally divergent. The W5500X uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus, with memory clocks at 1750 MHz and an effective speed of 14 Gbps, yielding 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9700 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, with memory at 2518 MHz and 20.1 Gbps effective, yielding 644.6 GB/s. In terms of API support, the W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the R9700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9700 also offers significantly more display outputs, with one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a, compared to the W5500X's two HDMI 2.0b ports. The R9700's power requirements are also much higher, with a TDP of 300 W and a suggested PSU of 700 W, versus the W5500X's 125 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU. The R9700 uses a single 16-pin power connector, while the W5500X relies on the Apple MPX bus interface. Physically, the R9700 is a 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide dual-slot card, while the W5500X's dimensions are not recorded. The R9700's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, and it was released in July 2025, while the W5500X was released in December 2019 and is now end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 has 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is nearly three times the 224.0 GB/s of the Radeon Pro W5500X. This is due to its 256 bit bus and 20.1 Gbps effective memory speed, versus the W5500X's 128 bit bus and 14 Gbps effective speed.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro W5500X support ray tracing?

A: No. The W5500X has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The Radeon AI PRO R9700, by contrast, includes 64 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the performance difference in compute benchmarks?

A: The R9700 achieves 118,202 in Geekbench OpenCL and 63,550 in Geekbench Vulkan. The W5500X only has a Geekbench Metal score of 27,973. The R9700 also delivers 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the W5500X delivers 5.398 TFLOPS.

Q: Which card is currently in production?

A: The Radeon AI PRO R9700 is marked as Active in the database, while the Radeon Pro W5500X is marked as End-of-life. The W5500X was released in December 2019, and the R9700 was released in July 2025.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The W5500X has an average benchmark score of 27,973 and sits in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs. The R9700 has an average benchmark score of 23,315 and sits in the 69th percentile. Despite the R9700's much higher raw compute, its average score is lower, which reflects the different benchmark suites recorded for each card.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The W5500X has a TDP of 125 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The R9700 has a TDP of 300 W and a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show a generational leap between the two cards. The W5500X uses the Navi 14 chip on RDNA 1.0, while the R9700 uses Navi 48 on RDNA 4.0. The process node shrinks from 7 nm to 4 nm, and transistor count jumps from 6,400 million to 53,900 million. The die size increases from 158 mm² to 357 mm². Transistor density rises from 40.5 million per mm² to 151.0 million per mm². The W5500X has a base clock of 1187 MHz and a boost clock of 1757 MHz, while the R9700 has a base clock of 1660 MHz, a game clock of 2350 MHz, and a boost clock of 2920 MHz. Memory capacity goes from 8 GB to 32 GB of GDDR6. The bus width doubles from 128 bit to 256 bit. Memory speed improves from 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) to 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). Bandwidth increases from 224.0 GB/s to 644.6 GB/s. The shading unit count grows from 1,536 to 4,096. TMUs increase from 96 to 256, and ROPs from 32 to 128. The R9700 adds 64 ray tracing cores, which the W5500X lacks. Pixel rate jumps from 56.22 GPixel/s to 373.8 GPixel/s. Texture rate improves from 168.7 GTexel/s to 747.5 GTexel/s. FP32 compute rises from 5.398 TFLOPS to 47.84 TFLOPS. FP16 performance also changes: the W5500X offers 10.80 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the R9700 offers 47.84 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The W5500X has a TDP of 125 W, while the R9700 has a TDP of 300 W. The W5500X uses an Apple MPX bus interface, while the R9700 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The W5500X has two HDMI 2.0b outputs, while the R9700 has one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the R9700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The W5500X has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the R9700 has a launch MSRP of 1,299 USD. The W5500X is end-of-life, and the R9700 is active with a predecessor of Radeon Pro Vega. The R9700 is physically 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, while the W5500X dimensions are not recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons are not recorded in the database, but the individual benchmark scores provide a clear picture. The W5500X's only recorded benchmark is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 27,973. This places it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 27,973. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 28,020, which the W5500X trails by 0.2 percent, and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M at 27,883, which the W5500X beats by 0.3 percent. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 at 27,839 is beaten by 0.5 percent, and the AMD FirePro S7150 at 28,117 is trailed by 0.5 percent. These are extremely tight margins, suggesting the W5500X is well-matched against mid-range GPUs from its era in Metal workloads. The R9700, in contrast, has a broader benchmark suite. Its strongest scores are in Geekbench OpenCL at 118,202, which is over four times the W5500X's Metal score, and Geekbench Vulkan at 63,550. In Passmark, the R9700 scores 26,979 in G3D, 15,300 in GPU Compute, 1,236 in G2D, 363 in DirectX 9, 272 in DirectX 11, 155 in DirectX 10, and 83 in DirectX 12. Its average benchmark score is 23,315, which places it in the 69th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M290X at 23,276, which the R9700 beats by 0.2 percent, the AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23,273, beaten by 0.2 percent, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23,250, beaten by 0.3 percent, and the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23,249, beaten by 0.3 percent. The W5500X's percentile rank is four points higher than the R9700's, despite the R9700's enormous compute advantage. This is because the percentile is derived from different benchmark averages, and the W5500X's Metal score is stronger relative to its rivals than the R9700's mixed suite is relative to its own. The R9700's FP32 throughput of 47.84 TFLOPS is the single largest performance gap between the two cards, representing an approximate 8.9 times advantage over the W5500X's 5.398 TFLOPS. The R9700's texture rate of 747.5 GTexel/s is similarly dominant, about 4.4 times the W5500X's 168.7 GTexel/s. Pixel rate tells the same story, with the R9700's 373.8 GPixel/s being roughly 6.6 times the W5500X's 56.22 GPixel/s. For any workload that scales with compute units, memory bandwidth, memory bandwidth, or ray tracing cores, the R9700 wins decisively. For Metal-specific workloads on Apple MPX hardware, the W5500X remains competitive, but the data shows its performance ceiling is far below the R9700's ceiling in nearly every measurable category.