AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 vs AMD Radeon PRO W7700 Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 represent two distinct generations of AMD professional hardware. The benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, with the W7700 leading in both recorded tests, yet the MI60 retains advantages in specific architectural and capacity metrics that matter for certain workloads. The average benchmark score for the W7700 is 118,976, placing it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the MI60 scores an average of 92,466, placing it in the 93rd percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench results show a decisive victory for the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. In the OpenCL test, the W7700 scores 108,245 against the MI60's 92,488, resulting in a 17% performance advantage. This gap widens significantly in the Vulkan test, where the W7700 achieves 129,706 points compared to the MI60's 92,444, a 40.3% lead. The W7700 wins both head-to-head matchups, with a total of 2 wins to 0 for the MI60.

The Vulkan result is particularly striking. A 40.3% delta indicates that the newer RDNA 3.0 architecture handles modern graphics APIs far more efficiently than the older GCN 5.1 design. For context, the W7700's Vulkan score of 129,706 is also higher than its own OpenCL score, suggesting strong driver optimization for this API. Meanwhile, the MI60's scores are remarkably consistent across both tests—92,488 in OpenCL and 92,444 in Vulkan—showing that its architecture does not benefit disproportionately from either API.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional perspective. The W7700's average score of 118,976 puts it 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GB10 and 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. It also leads the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 4% and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 4.4%. The MI60, with its 92,466 average, sits 4.8% behind the AMD Radeon Pro VII and 5.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900M, though it does lead the NVIDIA RTX A4500 by 0.9% and the RTX A4500 Mobile by 1.5%. These figures suggest the W7700 competes at a higher tier than the MI60, which aligns with its superior raw compute numbers.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip built on RDNA 3.0, with the codename "Wheat Nas," fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 uses the Vega 20 chip on GCN 5.1, fabricated on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. This process node difference—5 nm versus 7 nm—explains much of the efficiency and clock speed disparity.

Transistor counts tell a compelling story. The W7700 packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The MI60 has 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die, for a density of 40.0M per mm². The W7700 more than doubles the transistor count on a similarly sized die, which directly contributes to its higher compute throughput.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The W7700 operates at a base clock of 1900 MHz and boosts to 2600 MHz, while the MI60 runs at 1200 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost. The W7700's higher clocks, combined with its newer architecture, drive its performance advantage. Memory clocks also differ: the W7700 uses 2250 MHz GDDR6 with 18 Gbps effective speed, while the MI60 uses 1000 MHz HBM2 with 2 Gbps effective speed.

The compute unit configurations reveal different design priorities. The W7700 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 48 ray tracing cores. The MI60 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, but only 64 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores. Despite having fewer shading units, the W7700 achieves higher throughput due to its architecture and clock speeds. The W7700's FP32 performance is 31.95 TFLOPS versus the MI60's 14.75 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance is 63.90 TFLOPS versus 29.49 TFLOPS. The pixel rate favors the W7700 at 249.6 GPixel/s versus 115.2 GPixel/s, though the texture rate is closer: 499.2 GTexel/s versus 460.8 GTexel/s.

API support also differs. The W7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI60 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The W7700's newer API support likely contributes to its strong Vulkan benchmark showing.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 for compute-intensive workloads that leverage FP32 or FP16 performance. Its 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 output is more than double the MI60's 14.75 TFLOPS, and its 63.90 TFLOPS FP16 output similarly doubles the MI60's 29.49 TFLOPS. For any task that relies on raw shader throughput, the W7700 is the superior choice.

However, the MI60 has one decisive advantage: memory. It offers 32 GB of HBM2 with a 4096-bit bus and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, versus the W7700's 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. For workloads that require large memory capacity or extremely high memory bandwidth, the MI60 is the better option. The MI60's memory bandwidth is nearly double that of the W7700, which could be critical for large dataset processing or certain scientific compute tasks.

The production status also matters. The MI60 is marked as "End-of-life," while the W7700 has no such designation. This suggests the W7700 is the more future-proof investment, with ongoing driver support and availability. The MI60's release date of November 2018 also places it five years behind the W7700's November 2023 release, further reinforcing its legacy status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has an average benchmark score of 118,976, compared to the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60's 92,466. The W7700 also holds a higher percentile ranking at 95th versus the MI60's 93rd.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan workloads?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan testing, the W7700 scores 129,706 against the MI60's 92,444, a 40.3% difference. This is the largest single-test margin between the two cards.

Q: Does the MI60 have any advantage in memory specifications?

A: Yes. The MI60 offers 32 GB of HBM2 memory with a 4096-bit bus and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. The W7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, meaning the MI60 provides roughly double the memory capacity and nearly double the bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The W7700's Navi 32 chip has 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, for a density of 81.2M per mm². The MI60's Vega 20 chip has 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die, for a density of 40.0M per mm². The W7700's density is more than double.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has ray tracing cores, with 48 dedicated RT cores. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 has no RT cores listed in its specifications.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The W7700 has a TDP of 190 W and suggests a 450 W power supply, using a single 8-pin connector. The MI60 has a TDP of 300 W and suggests a 700 W power supply, using one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 wins in every benchmark category measured, and its advantages in compute throughput and efficiency are substantial. Its higher clock speeds—1900 MHz base and 2600 MHz boost versus 1200 MHz and 1800 MHz—contribute to its dominance in FP32 and FP16 workloads. The W7700 also wins on API support, offering DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, and includes ray tracing hardware that the MI60 lacks entirely. For general compute, rendering, or any task that benefits from modern graphics features, the W7700 is the clear winner.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 32 GB of HBM2 with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth is a significant asset for workloads that must hold large datasets in VRAM or require extremely fast memory access. The MI60 also has more shading units (4096 versus 3072) and TMUs (256 versus 192), though its lower clocks and older architecture prevent it from translating these into higher benchmark scores. For specific compute tasks where memory capacity is the bottleneck, the MI60 remains a viable option.

The MI60's 7 nm process node and lower transistor density mean it draws more power—300 W versus 190 W—and requires a larger power supply. It also uses more physical space at 267 mm length versus the W7700's 241 mm, though both are dual-slot cards. The MI60's single mini-DisplayPort output limits its display capabilities, while the W7700 offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node differs (5 nm for the W7700, 7 nm for the MI60), as does the transistor count (28,100 million versus 13,230 million) and die size (346 mm² versus 331 mm²). Clock speeds are significantly higher on the W7700, with a 1900 MHz base and 2600 MHz boost versus the MI60's 1200 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The W7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the MI60 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. The W7700 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 48 ray tracing cores. The MI60 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores.

Rates and throughput favor the W7700: pixel rate is 249.6 GPixel/s versus 115.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 499.2 GTexel/s versus 460.8 GTexel/s, FP32 is 31.95 TFLOPS versus 14.75 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 63.90 TFLOPS versus 29.49 TFLOPS. Power consumption is lower on the W7700 at 190 W versus 300 W, with a suggested PSU of 450 W versus 700 W. The power connectors differ as well: the W7700 uses a single 8-pin, while the MI60 requires a 6-pin plus an 8-pin.

Display outputs vary significantly: the W7700 has four DisplayPort 2.1 connections, while the MI60 has a single mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. API support differs in DirectX (12 Ultimate versus 12) and Vulkan (1.4 versus 1.3), though both support OpenGL 4.6. The W7700 has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the MI60 has no launch MSRP listed. Physical dimensions also differ, with the W7700 measuring 241 mm in length and the MI60 measuring 267 mm, both at 111 mm height.