AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs AMD Radeon Pro W5700 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 has a higher average benchmark score of 25726, while the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 records 23315. The W5700 sits at the 71st percentile of all GPUs, whereas the R9700 is at the 69th percentile.

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

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 scores 118202 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 36.9% higher than the W5700's 74613. This is the largest single benchmark gap in the head-to-head results.

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan compute?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 70706, beating the R9700's 63550 by 11.3%. This is the only head-to-head test the W5700 wins.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6. Both use a 256-bit memory bus, but the R9700's bandwidth is 644.6 GB/s versus 448.0 GB/s for the W5700.

Q: Which GPU has the newer architecture?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 uses RDNA 4.0 on a 4 nm process, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 uses RDNA 1.0 on a 7 nm process. The R9700 was released in 2025, whereas the W5700 launched in 2019.

Q: How do the DirectX 12 scores compare?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 scores 83 in Passmark DirectX 12, which is 34.9% higher than the W5700's 54. The R9700 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent distinct generations of AMD GPU design. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 is built on the Navi 10 chip using RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. It contains 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 41.0 million per mm². The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 uses the Navi 48 chip with RDNA 4.0 architecture on a 4 nm process, packing 53,900 million transistors into a 357 mm² die, for a density of 151.0 million per mm².

The compute configurations differ substantially. The W5700 has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The R9700 scales up to 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The R9700 also introduces 64 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the W5700. Neither card lists tensor cores in the database.

Clock behavior shows the generational leap. The W5700 runs at a 1400 MHz base and 1880 MHz boost, while the R9700 operates at 1660 MHz base and 2920 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2350 MHz. The R9700's memory clock is 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective), compared to the W5700's 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The R9700 delivers 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, more than 5.5 times the W5700's 8.663 TFLOPS. FP16 performance also differs: the W5700 achieves 17.33 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the R9700 reaches 47.84 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. Pixel rate jumps from 120.3 GPixel/s on the W5700 to 373.8 GPixel/s on the R9700, and texture rate rises from 270.7 GTexel/s to 747.5 GTexel/s.

API support reflects the newer architecture. The R9700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5700 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface also advances: the W5700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the R9700 uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Power requirements scale accordingly. The W5700 has a TDP of 205 W with a suggested 550 W power supply, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector. The R9700 draws 300 W with a suggested 700 W PSU, using a single 16-pin connector. Both cards are dual-slot designs with identical dimensions of 267 mm length and 111 mm height, though the R9700 adds a 40 mm width specification.

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a clear picture for most workloads: the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 wins 8 of 9 head-to-head tests, often by substantial margins. The R9700 leads by 46.2% in Passmark G3D, 57.5% in GPU compute, 61.8% in DirectX 11, and 36.9% in OpenCL. For users prioritizing raw compute, modern API support, or large memory capacity, the R9700 is the data-backed choice.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 retains one meaningful advantage: Vulkan performance. Its 11.3% lead in Geekbench Vulkan, combined with a higher average benchmark score (25726 vs 23315) and a higher percentile rank (71st vs 69th), suggests it remains competitive in Vulkan-specific workloads. The W5700 also has a lower TDP at 205 W versus 300 W, which matters for power-constrained systems.

However, the R9700's advantages are overwhelming in most categories. It offers 4 times the memory capacity (32 GB vs 8 GB), 43.7% higher memory bandwidth, 5.5 times the FP32 throughput, and ray tracing support. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R9 M290X (0.2% higher average score) and AMD Radeon RX 6600M (0.2% higher), indicating it sits in a competitive mid-range segment. The W5700's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (0.1% higher) and AMD Radeon RX 6700M (0.4% higher), placing it in a similar performance tier.

For new purchases, the data favors the R9700 unless Vulkan compute is the primary workload. The W5700 is marked end-of-life, while the R9700 is active in production. The R9700's launch MSRP is 1,299 USD, while the W5700's launch MSRP is 799 USD.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category in the database:

• Process node: 7 nm (W5700) vs 4 nm (R9700)
• Transistors: 10,300 million vs 53,900 million
• Die size: 251 mm² vs 357 mm²
• Transistor density: 41.0M / mm² vs 151.0M / mm²
• Base clock: 1400 MHz vs 1660 MHz
• Boost clock: 1880 MHz vs 2920 MHz
• Game clock: Not specified vs 2350 MHz
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) vs 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 8 GB vs 32 GB
• Memory bandwidth: 448.0 GB/s vs 644.6 GB/s
• Shading units: 2304 vs 4096
• TMUs: 144 vs 256
• ROPs: 64 vs 128
• Ray tracing cores: None vs 64
• Pixel rate: 120.3 GPixel/s vs 373.8 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 270.7 GTexel/s vs 747.5 GTexel/s
• FP32: 8.663 TFLOPS vs 47.84 TFLOPS
• FP16: 17.33 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 205 W vs 300 W
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: 550 W vs 700 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 vs PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display outputs: 5x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C vs 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Production status: End-of-life vs Active
• Release date: 2019-11-18 vs 2025-07-22
• Width: Not specified vs 40 mm

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 dominates the head-to-head results, winning 8 of 9 tests. The largest margin comes in Passmark DirectX 11, where the R9700 scores 272 against the W5700's 104, a 61.8% advantage. Passmark GPU Compute shows a 57.5% gap (15300 vs 6495), and Passmark G3D shows a 46.2% gap (26979 vs 14520). The R9700 also leads in DirectX 10 by 43.2% (155 vs 88), DirectX 9 by 38% (363 vs 225), DirectX 12 by 34.9% (83 vs 54), and Passmark G2D by 27.3% (1236 vs 899).

The Geekbench OpenCL test gives the R9700 a 36.9% lead (118202 vs 74613). This consistent pattern across DirectX generations, compute workloads, and 2D tests indicates the R9700's architectural advantages translate broadly into real performance gains.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700's sole victory comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 70706 against the R9700's 63550, an 11.3% margin. This result is notable because it reverses the trend seen in every other test. The W5700's Vulkan advantage may stem from driver maturity or architectural characteristics of RDNA 1.0 that favor this specific workload.

Despite the R9700's benchmark dominance, the W5700 maintains a higher average benchmark score (25726 vs 23315) and a higher percentile rank (71st vs 69th). This discrepancy arises because the two cards share only 9 common benchmark tests, and the W5700's additional benchmarks (including Geekbench Metal at 89557) contribute to its higher average.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is the clear winner for compute-intensive workloads. Its 57.5% lead in Passmark GPU Compute and 36.9% lead in Geekbench OpenCL make it the appropriate choice for tasks that leverage general-purpose GPU computing. The 32 GB memory capacity and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth position it for large datasets, while the 64 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the W5700 cannot perform. The R9700's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and 47.84 TFLOPS FP32 throughput further cement its suitability for modern graphics applications.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 wins specifically in Vulkan compute, with an 11.3% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. For software stacks that rely heavily on Vulkan, the W5700 may deliver better performance despite its older architecture. The W5700 also requires less power (205 W vs 300 W) and has a lower suggested PSU rating (550 W vs 700 W), which benefits systems with limited power delivery. Its higher average benchmark score and percentile rank indicate that across its full benchmark suite, it remains a competitive product.

For new deployments, the data favors the R9700 in almost every scenario except Vulkan-specific workloads. The W5700's end-of-life status and the R9700's active production status further reinforce this recommendation. The R9700's 4 nm process, 5.5 times higher FP32 throughput, and 4 times larger memory pool represent fundamental generational improvements that the benchmark results confirm.