AMD Radeon Pro Duo vs NVIDIA T1000 Comparison

The NVIDIA T1000 and AMD Radeon Pro Duo represent two very different approaches to professional graphics, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, with the T1000 taking the win, but the specifications reveal a much more complex story about how each card achieves its performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are surprisingly close. The NVIDIA T1000 scores 37,704 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro Duo scores 35,860 points. That gives the T1000 a 5.1% lead over the Radeon Pro Duo in this compute-oriented workload. While the T1000 wins this round, the margin is modest, and it is notably this is just a single benchmark — it does not represent the full picture of either card's capabilities.

Looking at the broader context, both cards sit at the 80th percentile among all GPUs, meaning they are roughly comparable in overall standing. The T1000's average benchmark score is 36,289, which is 1.2% higher than the Radeon Pro Duo's average of 35,860. This consistency across the average score and the single head-to-head test suggests the T1000 has a slight edge in general compute performance, but it is not a dominant victory.

The nearest rivals list for the T1000 reinforces this tight grouping. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M scores 36,529 (0.7% below the T1000), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X scores 36,530 (0.7% below), and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo scores 35,860 (1.2% below). The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 trails at 35,520, which is 2.2% behind the T1000. For the Radeon Pro Duo, its nearest rivals include the Quadro GV100 (1% ahead), the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (1.2% ahead), the T1000 (1.2% behind), and the RX 5300M (1.8% behind). These delta percentages are all within a few points of each other, indicating that these five cards are clustered in a similar performance band.

In terms of raw score deltas, the T1000's 37,704 OpenCL result is 1,844 points higher than the Radeon Pro Duo's 35,860. That is a real gap, but it is not a generational leap. The win count reflects this: the T1000 has one benchmark win, while the Radeon Pro Duo has zero. However, with only one test in the database, this is a limited sample size.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark. The NVIDIA T1000 is built on the Turing architecture with the TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo uses the older GCN 3.0 architecture with the Capsaicin chip, on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. This process difference is significant: 12 nm versus 28 nm means the T1000's transistors are much smaller, which directly impacts density.

The transistor counts tell the story. The T1000 packs 4,700 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro Duo has 8,900 million transistors on a much larger 596 mm² die, but its density is only 14.9 million per square millimeter. The T1000 is nearly 60% more dense, a direct result of the newer manufacturing process.

The memory subsystems could not be more different. The T1000 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s and a memory clock of 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective). The Radeon Pro Duo also has 4 GB, but it uses HBM memory on a massive 4096-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth — over three times the T1000's throughput. Its memory clock is just 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective), but the enormous bus width compensates entirely.

Compute resources are where the Radeon Pro Duo looks dominant on paper. It has 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations units. The T1000 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon Pro Duo has more than 4.5 times the shading units, 4.5 times the TMUs, and double the ROPs. This translates to raw throughput numbers: the Radeon Pro Duo delivers 8.192 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 8.192 TFLOPS of FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the T1000 manages 2.500 TFLOPS FP32 and 5.000 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The Radeon Pro Duo is over three times faster in FP32 and 1.6 times faster in FP16.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The Radeon Pro Duo achieves 64.00 GPixel/s and 256.0 GTexel/s, versus the T1000's 44.64 GPixel/s and 78.12 GTexel/s. The Radeon Pro Duo wins these by 43% and 228%, respectively. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so those features are absent from both.

API support differs slightly. The T1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro Duo supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The T1000 has a more recent DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The NVIDIA T1000 wins the only direct benchmark, and it does so with a 5.1% margin in OpenCL. Its average score is also higher. If the question is purely about which card performs better in the measured compute tests, the T1000 is the answer.

However, the Radeon Pro Duo's specifications suggest it should be substantially faster in certain workloads. Its 8.192 TFLOPS FP32 and 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are far beyond the T1000's capabilities. The fact that it still loses the OpenCL test is remarkable, and it points to architectural efficiency differences. The Turing architecture in the T1000 is clearly extracting much more real-world performance per transistor and per clock than GCN 3.0.

For users who prioritize raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth, the Radeon Pro Duo's specifications are objectively superior. But benchmark results indicate that the T1000's newer architecture delivers competitive scores despite having roughly one-third the FP32 throughput. The T1000 is also far more power-efficient, with a 50 W TDP versus the Radeon Pro Duo's 350 W. That is a seven-fold difference in power draw for a card that still wins the compute benchmark.

The production status of both cards is end-of-life, so neither is a forward-looking purchase. The T1000 was released in May 2021, while the Radeon Pro Duo came out in April 2016. The T1000's predecessor is Quadro Volta and its successor is Workstation Ampere. The Radeon Pro Duo's predecessor is FirePro GCN and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every major specification. The process node is 12 nm for the T1000 versus 28 nm for the Radeon Pro Duo. Transistor count is 4,700 million versus 8,900 million, and die size is 200 mm² versus 596 mm². Transistor density is 23.5 million per mm² versus 14.9 million per mm².

Memory type is GDDR6 for the T1000 versus HBM for the Radeon Pro Duo. The bus width is 128-bit versus 4096-bit, and bandwidth is 160.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s. Memory clock is 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) versus 500 MHz (1000 Mbps effective). Both have 4 GB of memory.

Shading units are 896 versus 4,096, TMUs are 56 versus 256, and ROPs are 32 versus 64. Pixel rate is 44.64 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 78.12 GTexel/s versus 256.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 2.500 TFLOPS versus 8.192 TFLOPS. FP16 is 5.000 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 8.192 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP is 50 W versus 350 W. Slot width is single-slot versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus 3x 8-pin. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 750 W. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 1.4a and 3x DisplayPort 1.2. Dimensions are 156 mm by 69 mm versus 277 mm by 111 mm. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) versus 12 (12_0), and Vulkan support is 1.4 versus 1.2.170. The release dates are May 2021 versus April 2016.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has an average benchmark score of 36,289, which is 1.2% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Duo's average of 35,860.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The T1000 provides 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth via a 128-bit GDDR6 bus, while the Radeon Pro Duo provides 512.0 GB/s via a 4096-bit HBM bus.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for both cards?

A: The T1000 delivers 2.500 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Radeon Pro Duo delivers 8.192 TFLOPS.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The T1000 has a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm², which is significantly higher than the Radeon Pro Duo's 14.9 million per mm².

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The T1000 has a TDP of 50 W, while the Radeon Pro Duo has a TDP of 350 W.

Q: Do either of these cards support ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No, neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores in their specifications.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA T1000 wins in the measured compute benchmarks. It takes the OpenCL test with a 5.1% margin, and its average score is higher. It also offers a more modern API set, with DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 support. The T1000 is dramatically more power-efficient, drawing 50 W versus 350 W, and it fits in a single slot with no external power connectors. Its suggested PSU is 250 W, compared to 750 W for the Radeon Pro Duo. The T1000 also has newer display outputs, with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

The AMD Radeon Pro Duo wins on raw specifications. Its 8.192 TFLOPS FP32 performance is over three times the T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS. Its 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is over three times higher. It has 4,096 shading units versus 896, 256 TMUs versus 56, and 64 ROPs versus 32. Its pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 256.0 GTexel/s both exceed the T1000's respective figures. The Radeon Pro Duo was released earlier, in April 2016, and it carries a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD.

For users whose workloads depend on the specific benchmarks measured, the T1000 is the better performer. For workloads that scale with raw FP32 throughput or memory bandwidth, the Radeon Pro Duo's specifications suggest it should excel, even though the measured data does not confirm this. The T1000 is the better choice for power-constrained environments, while the Radeon Pro Duo is suited for systems that can handle its dual-slot size, 350 W draw, and 750 W suggested PSU. The choice comes down to whether the benchmark results or the theoretical specifications matter more for a given task.