AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S vs NVIDIA B300 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S versus the NVIDIA B300. Neither part has an average benchmark score, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The wins counters for both sides are zero, indicating that no direct comparative measurements have been logged.

The absence of scores does not mean the comparison is empty. Raw specification data provides a basis for estimating relative performance in specific workloads. The NVIDIA B300 delivers 76.99 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 61% higher than the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S at 47.84 TFLOPS. For FP16 workloads, the gap widens dramatically: the B300 reaches 1,231.8 TFLOPS, while the R9700S offers 47.84 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. That represents a 25.7x advantage in raw FP16 throughput, a figure that reflects the B300's tensor-focused design.

Pixel throughput tells a different story. The R9700S achieves 373.8 GPixel/s, while the B300 manages 48.77 GPixel/s. The AMD part is 7.7x faster in pixel fill rate, which suggests a meaningful advantage in traditional rasterization-bound scenes. Texture rate favors the NVIDIA part: 1,202.9 GTexel/s versus 747.5 GTexel/s, a 1.6x margin.

Memory bandwidth is where the B300 dominates most decisively. The NVIDIA part delivers 4.10 TB/s across a 4096-bit HBM3e interface, compared to 644.6 GB/s on the AMD part's 256-bit GDDR6 bus. That is a 6.4x bandwidth advantage. The B300 also carries 144 GB of memory versus 32 GB, a 4.5x capacity lead.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD part boosts to 2920 MHz and runs a game clock of 2350 MHz. The NVIDIA part boosts to only 2032 MHz with a base of 1665 MHz. The R9700S's base clock of 1660 MHz nearly matches the B300's boost clock. Higher clocks on the AMD part partially offset its lower shader count, but not enough to close the FP32 gap.

The shading unit difference is substantial: 18,944 on the B300 versus 4,096 on the R9700S, a 4.6x margin. Texture mapping units follow at 592 versus 256, a 2.3x difference. The R9700S has 128 ROPs, while the B300 has only 24, explaining the pixel rate inversion.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA B300 has 4.10 TB/s bandwidth over a 4096-bit HBM3e interface. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 644.6 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 bus, giving the B300 a 6.4x bandwidth advantage.

Q: How do the two compare in raw FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA B300 delivers 76.99 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S delivers 47.84 TFLOPS. The B300 leads by 61% in FP32 throughput.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has a pixel rate of 373.8 GPixel/s, which is 7.7x higher than the NVIDIA B300's 48.77 GPixel/s. This stems from the R9700S having 128 ROPs versus the B300's 24 ROPs.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The NVIDIA B300 has 144 GB of HBM3e memory. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 32 GB of GDDR6. The B300 provides 4.5x more memory capacity.

Q: Which GPU supports display outputs?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S has 4x DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The NVIDIA B300 has no display outputs, consistent with its server-oriented SXM Module form factor.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S boosts to 2920 MHz with a game clock of 2350 MHz. The NVIDIA B300 boosts to 2032 MHz. The AMD part's boost clock is 44% higher.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S uses the Navi 48 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process. The die measures 357 mm² and contains 53,900 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The NVIDIA B300 uses the GB110 chip built on Blackwell Ultra architecture, also from TSMC but on a 5 nm process. The B300 contains 104,000 million transistors, nearly double the AMD part, though its die size is not recorded in the database.

The RDNA 4.0 architecture implements 64 ray tracing cores. The B300 does not list a ray tracing core count, but it includes 592 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the R9700S specification. The tensor core presence explains the B300's massive FP16 throughput: 1,231.8 TFLOPS at a 16:1 ratio versus the R9700S's 1:1 FP16 ratio. The AMD part processes FP16 at the same rate as FP32, while the NVIDIA part prioritizes tensor math over general compute.

The B300 belongs to the Server Blackwell generation with the codename generation field reading "Server Blackwell (Bxx)". Its predecessor is listed as Server Hopper, and its successor is Server Rubin. The R9700S belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation, with a predecessor of Radeon Pro Vega. Both parts are currently marked Active in production status.

API support differs completely. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part lists no API support in the database, consistent with its server role where graphics APIs are less relevant than compute frameworks. The R9700S has a Dual-slot form factor with a 1x 16-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 700 W. The B300 arrives as an SXM Module with no power connector listed and a suggested PSU of 1800 W.

The process node difference is notable: 4 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. Despite the larger node, the B300 packs more than double the transistors, indicating a much larger physical die. The R9700S's transistor density of 151.0M per mm² is a direct consequence of the smaller node and more compact design.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S | NVIDIA B300 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | Blackwell Ultra |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 53,900 million | 104,000 million |

| Die Size | 357 mm² | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 1660 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2920 MHz | 2032 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2350 MHz | Not applicable |

| Memory Size | 32 GB GDDR6 | 144 GB HBM3e |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 644.6 GB/s | 4.10 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 18,944 |

| TMUs | 256 | 592 |

| ROPs | 128 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 64 | Not recorded |

| Tensor Cores | Not applicable | 592 |

| FP32 | 47.84 TFLOPS | 76.99 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 47.84 TFLOPS (1:1) | 1,231.8 TFLOPS (16:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 373.8 GPixel/s | 48.77 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 747.5 GTexel/s | 1,202.9 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 300 W | 1400 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | Not recorded |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 1800 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1a | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | Not recorded |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | Not recorded |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2025-12-10 | 2025-09-10 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Server Hopper |

| Successor | Not recorded | Server Rubin |

The bus interface matches on both parts: PCIe 5.0 x16. The memory type differs fundamentally, GDDR6 versus HBM3e, which drives the bandwidth and capacity gaps. The release dates show the B300 launched three months earlier. The R9700S lists dimensions of 267 mm length, 109 mm height, and 39 mm width, while the B300 has no dimensions recorded due to its modular form factor.

The Verdict

The data describes two GPUs with almost no overlap in intended use. The NVIDIA B300 is a compute-oriented server module. Its 144 GB of HBM3e memory, 4.10 TB/s bandwidth, 592 tensor cores, and 1,231.8 TFLOPS of FP16 throughput position it for large-scale AI training and inference workloads. The 1400 W TDP and 1800 W suggested PSU confirm a data-center deployment scenario, not a desktop one.

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700S is a workstation card with display outputs, a 300 W TDP, and a dual-slot form factor. Its 4x DisplayPort 2.1a outputs and 64 ray tracing cores make it suitable for graphics-intensive professional tasks. The 373.8 GPixel/s pixel rate suggests strong rasterization performance, and the 2920 MHz boost clock indicates responsiveness in latency-sensitive workloads.

For users running FP32-heavy graphics pipelines, the B300's 76.99 TFLOPS represents a 61% advantage over the R9700S, but that margin comes with a 4.7x higher TDP. For memory-bound workloads, the B300's 4.10 TB/s bandwidth is decisive. For rendering or display-driven tasks, the R9700S is the only one of the two with any output capability, and its 7.7x higher pixel rate gives it a clear edge in fill-limited scenarios.

The B300's FP16 performance, at 25.7x the R9700S, is the single largest specification gap in this comparison. Anyone whose workload depends on tensor operations should select the B300 without hesitation. Anyone whose workload depends on rasterization, ray tracing, or display output should select the R9700S, as the B300 lacks the necessary hardware features for those tasks.

The 32 GB memory capacity on the R9700S is substantial for a workstation card, but the 144 GB on the B300 serves a different class of problem. Large language models and massive datasets require the B300's capacity and bandwidth. Smaller models, visual effects rendering, and CAD workloads fit within the R9700S's 32 GB allocation.

The production status for both parts is Active, so neither is a legacy product. The release dates, September 2025 for the B300 and December 2025 for the R9700S, indicate that both are current-generation offerings. The B300's successor, Server Rubin, is already listed, suggesting an upcoming refresh cycle. The R9700S has no successor recorded.

Neither part has benchmark scores in the database, which means the verdict rests on architectural and specification analysis rather than measured performance. The data shows two complementary tools for different problem domains. The B300 maximizes compute throughput, memory capacity, and bandwidth at the cost of power and physical footprint. The R9700S balances compute, graphics features, and display output in a conventional workstation package. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload is compute-centric or graphics-centric.