AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800S Comparison

The benchmark data presents a decisive generational clash: the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 dominates the AMD Radeon RX 6800S in nearly every measurable category, winning 9 out of 10 head-to-head tests. The RX 6800S manages a single victory in Vulkan compute, but the R9700’s margin of victory elsewhere is often overwhelming. This is not a close contest; it is a clear demonstration of architectural and generational superiority.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in the 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12 test, which is a modern DirectX 12 workload. The R9700 scores 7006, while the RX 6800S manages only 1689. This represents a delta of -75.9% for the older card, meaning the R9700 is roughly four times faster in this demanding scenario. This single result sets the tone for the entire comparison, indicating a massive gap in raw rasterization and ray-tracing capability.

In compute-heavy workloads, the R9700’s lead is equally pronounced. The passmark_gpu_compute test shows the R9700 scoring 15300 against the RX 6800S’s 6144, a delta of -59.8%. Similarly, in geekbench_opencl, the R9700 achieves 118202 points, which is 38.1% higher than the RX 6800S’s 73202. These results are consistent with the R9700’s doubled shading units and significantly higher FP32 throughput.

The R9700 also sweeps all the legacy DirectX tests. In passmark_directx_11, it scores 272 versus 139 for the RX 6800S, a delta of -48.9%. The passmark_directx_10 test shows a similar pattern: 155 for the R9700 versus 91 for the RX 6800S, a -41.3% delta. Even in the older passmark_directx_9 test, the R9700 leads with 363 points against 200, a -44.9% difference. These consistent wins across API generations show that the R9700’s advantage is not workload-specific but fundamental.

The passmark_g3d score, a general indicator of 3D rendering performance, reinforces the trend. The R9700 scores 26979, which is 41% higher than the RX 6800S’s 15908. The passmark_directx_12 test, while closer, still favors the R9700 with a score of 83 versus 65, a -21.7% delta. Even the 2D performance, measured by passmark_g2d, shows the R9700 ahead at 1236 versus 732, a -40.8% difference.

The sole exception is geekbench_vulkan, where the RX 6800S scores 81272 against the R9700’s 63550. This gives the RX 6800S a 27.9% victory. This is a notable outlier, suggesting that in specific Vulkan compute scenarios, the older RDNA 2.0 architecture can outperform the newer RDNA 4.0 part. However, it is an isolated result against a backdrop of overwhelming defeat.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 for almost any use case. Its victory in 9 out of 10 benchmarks, including all DirectX 11/12 tests and compute workloads, makes it the superior choice for gaming, content creation, and professional applications. The R9700’s 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the RX 6800S’s 8.602 TFLOPS, a difference that is clearly reflected in the benchmark scores.

For users prioritizing raw performance and future-proofing, the R9700 is the only logical choice. Its 32 GB of memory is four times the RX 6800S’s 8 GB, and its 644.6 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the 256.0 GB/s of the older card. This makes the R9700 suitable for large datasets, AI workloads, and high-resolution textures, areas where the RX 6800S would be severely limited.

The RX 6800S, however, is not without merit. Its single win in the Vulkan benchmark is a specific advantage for developers or users running Vulkan-based compute tasks. Additionally, its 100 W TDP is a fraction of the R9700’s 300 W, and its IGP slot width indicates it is designed for portable devices. The data suggests that the RX 6800S is a capable mobile part, but it is in a different performance class entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is the clear winner in all scenarios requiring maximum graphics throughput. This includes modern DirectX 12 gaming, as evidenced by the 3DMark Steel Nomad result, and any DirectX 11 legacy titles. Its massive lead in compute benchmarks (OpenCL and GPU Compute) makes it the superior choice for rendering, scientific simulation, and machine learning tasks. The 32 GB memory pool is a decisive advantage for professional workloads that exceed the 8 GB capacity of the RX 6800S.

The AMD Radeon RX 6800S’s only benchmark victory is in Vulkan compute. The data indicates that for applications that heavily utilize the Vulkan API for general-purpose GPU computing, the RX 6800S outperforms the R9700 by 27.9%. This is a niche but real advantage. Furthermore, its power envelope and portable form factor make it the only viable option for thin-and-light laptops where the R9700’s dual-slot design and 300 W TDP would be impossible to accommodate.

The R9700 also wins in every DirectX version tested, from 9 to 12, indicating that it handles legacy APIs with greater efficiency. The RX 6800S’s performance in these tests is consistently lower, suggesting that its architecture is less optimized for these older workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the 3DMark Steel Nomad benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is significantly faster, scoring 7006 compared to the RX 6800S’s 1689, a delta of -75.9% for the older card.

Q: Does the RX 6800S win any benchmarks against the R9700?

A: Yes, the RX 6800S wins the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 81272 versus the R9700’s 63550, a 27.9% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 performance?

A: The R9700 offers 47.84 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is significantly higher than the RX 6800S’s 8.602 TFLOPS. The R9700 also offers FP16 at the same rate (1:1), while the RX 6800S achieves its FP16 number via a 2:1 ratio.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The R9700 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6800S has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The R9700 has a TDP of 300 W, while the RX 6800S has a TDP of 100 W. The R9700 also requires a 16-pin power connector and a 700 W recommended PSU, whereas the RX 6800S uses no external power connectors.

Q: What are the manufacturing process nodes?

A: The R9700 is built on a 4 nm process, while the RX 6800S uses a 7 nm process. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different generations of AMD’s RDNA architecture. The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, utilizing the Navi 23 chip. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 is based on the newer RDNA 4.0 architecture, using the larger Navi 48 chip. This generational leap is the primary driver of the performance difference.

The R9700’s Navi 48 chip is significantly more complex, containing 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, compared to the RX 6800S’s 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die. This is a stark difference in scale, enabled by the R9700’s more advanced 4 nm process node versus the 7 nm node of the older card. The transistor density has also increased from 46.7M / mm² on the RX 6800S to 151.0M / mm² on the R9700.

The R9700 doubles the execution resources of the RX 6800S, featuring 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, compared to 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs on the RX 6800S. The ray tracing cores have also been doubled, from 32 on the RX 6800S to 64 on the R9700. These architectural upgrades directly translate into the higher pixel rate (373.8 GPixel/s vs 134.4 GPixel/s) and texture rate (747.5 GTexel/s vs 268.8 GTexel/s) of the R9700.

Specification Differences

The most critical specification difference is the memory configuration. The R9700 offers 32 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 6800S is limited to 8 GB with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s. This makes the R9700 far more suitable for high-resolution textures and large compute datasets.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The R9700 has a lower base clock of 1660 MHz but a much higher boost clock of 2920 MHz, with a game clock of 2350 MHz. The RX 6800S has a base clock of 1800 MHz and a boost of 2100 MHz, with a game clock of 1975 MHz. The R9700’s higher boost clock contributes to its superior performance.

The power and physical requirements are polar opposites. The R9700 is a dual-slot card with a 300 W TDP, requiring a 16-pin power connector and a 700 W suggested PSU. It measures 267 mm in length. The RX 6800S is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 100 W TDP and no power connectors, making it suitable for portable devices. The bus interface also differs, with the R9700 using PCIe 5.0 x16 and the RX 6800S using PCIe 4.0 x8. The R9700 offers discrete display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a), while the RX 6800S’s outputs are described as “Portable Device Dependent.”