AMD Radeon HD 8750M vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server Comparison

NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server and AMD Radeon HD 8750M occupy vastly different corners of the GPU landscape, separated by over a decade of architectural evolution. The data places both at the 34th percentile among all GPUs, yet their benchmark scores are nearly identical despite their extreme differences in design philosophy, process technology, and target use cases. The RTX PRO 6000 is a 600-watt dual-slot server monster built on a 5 nm process with 92,200 million transistors, while the HD 8750M is a 28 nm mobile chip from 2013 with just 950 million transistors. That both land within 26 points of each other in aggregate benchmarks raises immediate questions about what these scores actually measure and how relevant they are to the intended workloads of each card.

FAQ

Q: How do the aggregate benchmark scores compare between the two cards?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while the HD 8750M scores 5970 in Geekbench OpenCL. This puts the NVIDIA card just 26 points ahead, a delta of roughly 0.4 percent, and both share the same 34th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 offers 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth across a 512-bit GDDR7 bus, whereas the HD 8750M provides 28.80 GB/s over a 128-bit DDR3 interface. The NVIDIA card delivers approximately 62 times the raw memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card according to the data?

A: For the RTX PRO 6000, the nearest rivals are the GTX 770M (6000, -0.1% delta) and RX 6400 (6001, -0.1%). For the HD 8750M, the closest are the Quadro K4000 (5982, -0.2%) and Quadro K620M (5957, +0.2% delta).

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No. The RTX PRO 6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the HD 8750M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1). The NVIDIA card also supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to Vulkan 1.2.170 on the AMD part.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is listed as Active production with a release date of March 2025, while the HD 8750M is End-of-life, having launched in February 2013 with its predecessor named London and successor Gem System.

Q: Which card has ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX PRO 6000 includes these features, with 188 ray tracing cores and 752 tensor cores. The HD 8750M has no RT cores and no tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is enormous, starting with the manufacturing process. The RTX PRO 6000 uses TSMC's 5 nm node with 92,200 million transistors packed into a 750 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The HD 8750M relies on a 28 nm process with only 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving it a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter — roughly one-tenth the density of the newer part.

The compute architectures themselves belong to different eras. NVIDIA's Blackwell 2.0 architecture powers the RTX PRO 6000, with 24,064 shading units, 752 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operation pipelines. It also integrates 188 ray tracing cores and 752 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture in the HD 8750M provides 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no dedicated ray tracing or tensor hardware. The shader count difference is a factor of 62.7, while TMUs differ by a factor of 31.3 and ROPs by a factor of 24.

Clock speeds tell a similar story of generational advancement. The RTX PRO 6000 runs at a base clock of 1590 MHz with a boost up to 2617 MHz, while the HD 8750M operates at 775 MHz base and 825 MHz boost. Even at idle, the NVIDIA part's base clock is nearly double the AMD card's boost clock. Memory technology also diverges sharply: GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus versus DDR3 on a 128-bit bus. The RTX PRO 6000's memory runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), while the HD 8750M's memory runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). The PCIe interface differs as well, with the NVIDIA card using PCIe 5.0 x16 and the AMD part using PCIe 3.0 x8.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark data is absent from the fact pack, so the comparison relies on each card's single benchmark result. The RTX PRO 6000's 5996 score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and the HD 8750M's 5970 in Geekbench OpenCL are not directly comparable tests, but their proximity is striking. Both cards sit at the 34th percentile, and their nearest rivals cluster tightly within a 0.3 percent delta.

The RTX PRO 6000's nearest rivals — GTX 770M at 6000 and RX 6400 at 6001 — show the NVIDIA server card trailing by just 0.1 percent. Meanwhile, the HD 8750M's nearest rivals — Quadro K4000 at 5982 and K620M at 5957 — show the AMD card slightly ahead of some and behind others. The Quadro K4000M appears in both rivals lists: it scores 5986, which is 0.2 percent below the RTX PRO 6000 and 0.3 percent below the HD 8750M. This overlapping rival set suggests that in aggregate synthetic benchmarks, these two cards perform in the same broad neighborhood despite their vastly different specifications.

The compute throughput figures underscore how misleading aggregate scores can be. The RTX PRO 6000 delivers 126.0 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 502.5 GPixel/s pixel fill rate, alongside a texture rate of 1,968.0 GTexel/s. The HD 8750M manages 633.6 GFLOPS FP32, 6.600 GPixel/s, and 19.80 GTexel/s. These represent performance gaps of roughly 199x in FP32, 76x in pixel rate, and 99x in texture rate. That such different raw capabilities produce nearly identical benchmark scores implies the benchmark tests are not exercising the RTX PRO 6000's strengths, or the server card is heavily throttled or constrained in this particular test scenario.

Specification Differences

The specification table reveals differences in nearly every measurable category:

• Process Node: 5 nm (RTX PRO 6000) vs 28 nm (HD 8750M)
• Transistors: 92,200 million vs 950 million
• Die Size: 750 mm² vs 77 mm²
• Transistor Density: 122.9M/mm² vs 12.3M/mm²
• Base Clock: 1590 MHz vs 775 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2617 MHz vs 825 MHz
• Memory Size: 96 GB vs 1024 MB (1 GB)
• Memory Type: GDDR7 vs DDR3
• Memory Bus: 512 bit vs 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 1.79 TB/s vs 28.80 GB/s
• Memory Clock: 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) vs 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective)
• Shading Units: 24,064 vs 384
• TMUs: 752 vs 24
• ROPs: 192 vs 8
• RT Cores: 188 vs none
• Tensor Cores: 752 vs none
• Pixel Rate: 502.5 GPixel/s vs 6.600 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 1,968.0 GTexel/s vs 19.80 GTexel/s
• FP32: 126.0 TFLOPS vs 633.6 GFLOPS
• FP16: 126.0 TFLOPS (1:1) vs none listed
• TDP: 600 W vs not listed
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs not listed
• Power Connectors: 1x 16-pin vs not listed
• Suggested PSU: 1000 W vs not listed
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x8
• Display Outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1b vs none listed
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 vs 1.2.170
• Dimensions: 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm vs none listed
• Release Date: March 2025 vs February 2013
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life

Where Each One Wins

The RTX PRO 6000 wins in every technical specification category where data exists. It holds commanding leads in raw compute throughput, memory capacity and bandwidth, feature support, and modern API compatibility. The presence of 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores makes it suitable for ray-traced rendering and AI inference workloads, while the 96 GB of GDDR7 memory provides capacity for large datasets and models. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and DisplayPort 2.1b outputs position it as a current-generation workstation or server component. The 600 W TDP and 1000 W suggested PSU indicate it is designed for robust desktop or rack-mounted systems with adequate power delivery.

The HD 8750M's advantages are more circumstantial. As a mobile GPU from 2013 with no listed TDP, dimensions, or power connectors, it was clearly designed for laptop integration where power efficiency matters. Its 28 nm process and 775 MHz base clock suggest it operated at much lower power draw, though exact figures are absent from the data. The 1024 MB of DDR3 memory and 128-bit bus were typical for its era, and its DirectX 12 (11_1) support would have been adequate for games of that period. The card's End-of-life status means it is now legacy hardware, but its small die size and likely low power footprint could theoretically make it suitable for embedded or low-power applications, assuming driver support remains available.

In terms of benchmark percentile, both cards tie at 34th, which places them in the lower-middle range of all GPUs. However, this percentile likely reflects the synthetic benchmarks tested rather than real-world workload performance. The RTX PRO 6000's 5996 score in a DX12 test and the HD 8750M's 5970 in OpenCL suggest that the aggregate benchmark suite does not heavily weight the server card's specialized capabilities.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split: the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is the superior product in nearly every measurable way, while the HD 8750M is a legacy mobile part from a different technological era. Anyone building a modern workstation or server for compute-heavy tasks — particularly those involving ray tracing, tensor operations, or massive memory footprints — should choose the RTX PRO 6000. Its 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 96 GB memory capacity, and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth provide the headroom that the HD 8750M cannot approach. The NVIDIA card's Active production status and 2025 release date also ensure ongoing driver support and compatibility with current software stacks.

The HD 8750M, by contrast, is only relevant for legacy systems or applications that specifically require its GCN 1.0 architecture. Its End-of-life status, 2013 release date, and 1 GB memory limit make it unsuitable for modern workloads. The absence of RT cores and tensor cores eliminates any possibility of accelerated ray tracing or AI features. Its Vulkan 1.2.170 support and DirectX 12 (11_1) are outdated compared to the RTX PRO 6000's Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate.

The near-identical benchmark scores — 5996 versus 5970 — should not be interpreted as equivalent real-world performance. The RTX PRO 6000's massive advantages in compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and feature set mean it will vastly outperform the HD 8750M in any workload that can utilize its capabilities. The benchmark parity likely reflects the synthetic tests' inability to stress the server card's architecture, or the RTX PRO 6000 being tested in a configuration that does not represent its full potential. For any modern use case, the RTX PRO 6000 is the only viable choice. The HD 8750M remains a historical artifact, and the data suggests it should be treated as such.