AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 vs AMD Radeon PRO W7900 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of two very different compute accelerators with distinct roles. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 dominates the single available head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL workload, by a decisive 23.1% margin. This is a workstation-class part built for heavy graphics and compute tasks, and its victory in OpenCL reflects its broader capability across modern workloads.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI25, by contrast, is a data center compute card from a previous generation. It has no wins in the head-to-head comparison, but that does not mean it lacks a purpose. Its profile in the database shows it still holds a 90th percentile position among all GPUs, which indicates that even an aging accelerator can handle substantial compute workloads. The MI25 was designed for machine learning inference and high-performance computing, where raw FP16 throughput matters more than graphics features or display connectivity.

For users deciding between the two, the split is straightforward. The W7900 wins everywhere the two overlap in measured performance. It is faster in OpenCL, supports modern graphics APIs, and includes display outputs. The MI25 has no display outputs at all, making it unsuitable for any workstation task that requires visual output. Its only advantage is qualitative: it is a dual-slot card, while the W7900 is a triple-slot design, which may matter in dense server chassis with limited spacing.

The data also shows the W7900 sits in a higher performance tier overall. Its average benchmark score of 110,725 places it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the MI25 averages 68,562 and sits in the 90th percentile. The percentile gap is smaller than the raw score gap because the MI25 is still competitive with cards from its own era, but the W7900 is simply in a different class of performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 84,379 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 scores 68,562. That is a 23.1% advantage for the W7900.

Q: Does the Radeon Instinct MI25 support display outputs?

A: No, the MI25 has no display outputs. It is a compute-only accelerator. The W7900, in contrast, offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI25 has 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 436.2 GB/s. The W7900 offers both more capacity and higher bandwidth.

Q: How do their FP32 compute figures compare?

A: The W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The MI25 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS. This is a roughly 5x advantage for the W7900.

Q: Which card is better for modern graphics APIs?

A: The W7900 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI25 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The W7900 has the more current API support.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The Radeon PRO W7900 is listed as Active in production. The Radeon Instinct MI25 is End-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 84,379, and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 scores 68,562. The delta is 23.1% in favor of the W7900.

This is a substantial margin, but it is worth contextualizing. The MI25 is not an embarrassment in absolute terms. Its score of 68,562 places it within 0.4% of the Intel Arc A770 (68,809) and within 0.6% of the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69,000) in the database's rival list. It also trails the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (69,870) by 1.9% and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (69,986) by 2%. These are tight margins, meaning the MI25 remains competitive with a specific generation of workstation and compute cards.

The W7900, by contrast, sits among much faster company. Its average score of 110,725 is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (109,617) and 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944) by 2.8% and the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395) by 3.2%. These are close margins as well, but at a much higher absolute performance level.

The gap between the two cards in OpenCL is larger than the gap between either card and its nearest rivals. That suggests the W7900 and MI25 are not direct competitors in the same performance band. The W7900 is closer to high-end NVIDIA workstation and data center parts, while the MI25 is closer to mid-range cards from several years ago.

Neither card shows a benchmark profile with multiple tests. The W7900 has two recorded scores: 84,379 in Geekbench OpenCL and 137,070 in Geekbench Vulkan. The MI25 has only the single OpenCL score. This limits the direct comparison to one workload, but the OpenCL result is consistent with the overall performance tier each card occupies.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The W7900 uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the MI25 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The W7900 packs 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, for a transistor density of 109.1 million per mm². The MI25 has 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, for a density of 25.3 million per mm².

Clock speeds favor the W7900 as well. Its base clock is 1760 MHz, boosting to 2495 MHz. The MI25 runs at a 1400 MHz base and a 1500 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the W7900 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the MI25 runs at 852 MHz (1704 Mbps effective).

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The W7900 offers 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MI25 offers 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 436.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The W7900 has triple the capacity and roughly double the bandwidth.

Compute resources also diverge sharply. The W7900 has 6144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, and 192 raster operations pipelines. It also has 96 ray tracing cores. The MI25 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: the W7900 reaches 479.0 GPixel/s and 958.1 GTexel/s, while the MI25 reaches 96.00 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s.

FP32 throughput is dramatically different: 61.32 TFLOPS for the W7900 versus 12.29 TFLOPS for the MI25. FP16 performance is also different in nature. The W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the MI25 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

Power and physical specs differ as well. The W7900 has a 295 W TDP and a 600 W suggested PSU, while the MI25 has a 300 W TDP and a 700 W suggested PSU. The W7900 is triple-slot and 280 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 51 mm wide. The MI25 is dual-slot and 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, with no recorded width. Both use 2x 8-pin power connectors. The W7900 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the MI25 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards spans two full generations of AMD GPU design. The W7900 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Navi 31 chip with the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation. The MI25 is built on GCN 5.0, using the Vega 10 chip, and belongs to the Radeon Instinct MIx generation.

The process node difference is significant. The W7900 is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, while the MI25 uses GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. This explains much of the transistor density gap: 109.1 million transistors per mm² versus 25.3 million. The W7900 fits 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, while the MI25 fits 12,500 million on a 495 mm² die.

The W7900 includes 96 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the MI25. This reflects the RDNA 3.0 architecture's focus on modern graphics workloads, including real-time ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. The MI25, as a GCN-era compute card, has no ray tracing hardware at all.

API support also reflects the architectural divide. The W7900 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI25 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6. The W7900 also has display outputs (3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1), while the MI25 has none, confirming its role as a headless compute accelerator.

Memory technology differs fundamentally. The W7900 uses GDDR6, while the MI25 uses HBM2. The MI25's HBM2 memory runs on a much wider 2048-bit bus, but its effective speed is far lower, resulting in 436.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The W7900's GDDR6 runs on a 384-bit bus at a much higher effective speed, delivering 864.0 GB/s.

The MI25 does have one architectural advantage in FP16 compute. Its 2:1 FP16 ratio means it can perform FP16 math at twice its FP32 rate, reaching 24.58 TFLOPS. The W7900's 1:1 ratio means its FP16 throughput equals its FP32 throughput at 61.32 TFLOPS. Even with the MI25's FP16 advantage ratio, the W7900 still delivers more than double the FP16 throughput.

The release dates tell the story of their separation. The MI25 launched in 2017, while the W7900 launched in 2023. The MI25 is now end-of-life, while the W7900 remains active in production. The MI25's predecessor is the FirePro Data Center line, while the W7900's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega series. Neither card has a listed successor in the database.