AMD Radeon PRO V710 vs AMD Radeon RX 7900M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive advantage for the AMD Radeon RX 7900M across the two shared benchmark tests. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RX 7900M scores 4201, while the Radeon PRO V710 scores 853, resulting in a 392.5% delta in favor of the RX 7900M. This is not a marginal lead; it is a roughly fivefold performance gap in a modern DirectX 12 workload, suggesting the RX 7900M is in an entirely different performance tier for this type of rendering task.

The second shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, narrows the gap considerably. The RX 7900M posts 129,499, while the PRO V710 manages 116,460. The delta here is 11.2% in favor of the RX 7900M. While still a clear win, this result shows that in compute-oriented OpenCL workloads, the PRO V710 is much closer to its competitor, likely due to its different memory configuration and raw compute characteristics. The RX 7900M wins both head-to-head tests, but the margin tells two different stories: one of overwhelming graphics dominance and one of moderate compute superiority.

The average benchmark score reinforces this split. The RX 7900M has an average score of 97,487, while the PRO V710 averages 58,657. That is a 66.2% gap in aggregate performance. The RX 7900M sits at the 94th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the PRO V710 sits at the 88th percentile. Both are above-average performers, but the RX 7900M is closer to the top of the stack.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900M wins decisively, scoring 4201 versus the Radeon PRO V710's 853, a 392.5% advantage.

Q: How do the two compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 7900M scores 129,499, which is 11.2% higher than the PRO V710's 116,460. The RX 7900M wins, but the gap is much smaller than in the 3DMark test.

Q: What are the percentile rankings of each GPU?

A: The RX 7900M ranks in the 94th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the PRO V710 ranks in the 88th percentile.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The RX 7900M averages 97,487, while the PRO V710 averages 58,657. The RX 7900M holds a substantial aggregate lead.

Q: How does the RX 7900M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: According to the database, the RX 7900M is 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro VII, 4.3% behind the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000, 5.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60, and 6.3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500.

Q: How does the PRO V710 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The PRO V710 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA P102-100, 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, 0.7% ahead of the Intel Arc A570M, and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for users prioritizing raw graphics performance: the AMD Radeon RX 7900M. Its 392.5% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 is the single largest differentiator in the entire comparison. Anyone running DirectX 12 gaming or similar real-time rendering workloads should select the RX 7900M without hesitation. It also holds the edge in OpenCL compute, though the smaller 11.2% margin means it is not a blowout in that domain.

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 is the alternative for workloads that benefit from its unique memory characteristics. The database shows it has 28 GB of memory, which is 12 GB more than the RX 7900M. For tasks that are capacity-bound rather than bandwidth-bound, such as certain large dataset compute jobs, the PRO V710's larger pool may be the deciding factor. However, the benchmark results indicate that in the tests recorded here, the RX 7900M's performance advantages outweigh the PRO V710's memory capacity.

The aggregate numbers favor the RX 7900M: a 97,487 average score versus 58,657, and a 94th percentile ranking versus the 88th. The PRO V710's nearest rivals are all within 1% of its average score, placing it in a tightly contested mid-range cluster, while the RX 7900M's rivals include much higher-scoring parts like the Quadro RTX 6000. The verdict is that the RX 7900M is the superior performer in the recorded benchmarks, while the PRO V710 offers a distinct memory capacity advantage that may suit specific professional use cases.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ significantly in core configuration. The RX 7900M has 4,608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 192 ROPs. The PRO V710 has 3,456 shading units, 216 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RX 7900M also has 72 ray tracing cores versus 54 on the PRO V710. These differences directly explain the large 3DMark delta, as the RX 7900M has 33% more shading units and double the ROP count.

Clock speeds also differ. The RX 7900M has a base clock of 1825 MHz and a boost clock of 2090 MHz. The PRO V710 has a higher base clock of 1900 MHz but a lower boost clock of 2000 MHz. Despite the higher base clock on the PRO V710, the RX 7900M's higher boost clock and larger core count give it the performance edge.

Memory specifications are a major point of divergence. The RX 7900M has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The PRO V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 on a 224-bit bus, yielding 504.0 GB/s. The PRO V710 has 75% more memory capacity, but the RX 7900M has 14.3% more bandwidth. Effective memory clock is the same for both at 2250 MHz, or 18 Gbps effective.

The power profiles differ as well. The RX 7900M has a TDP of 180 W and uses no power connectors, as it is an integrated graphics product (IGP). The PRO V710 has a lower TDP of 158 W but requires a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 450 W power supply. The RX 7900M is an IGP with no slot width, while the PRO V710 is a single-slot card. The RX 7900M's display outputs are portable device dependent, while the PRO V710 has no display outputs at all.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, but they use different chips. The RX 7900M uses the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito, from the Navi Mobile generation (RX 7000M series). The PRO V710 uses the Navi 32 chip, codenamed Wheat Nas, from the Radeon Pro Navi generation (Navi III Series). Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

The transistor counts are substantially different. The Navi 31 chip has 57,700 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², giving a transistor density of 109.1 million per mm². The Navi 32 chip has 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, giving a density of 81.2 million per mm². The RX 7900M's chip has more than double the transistor count and a larger die, reflecting its higher performance ceiling.

Compute rates follow the hardware differences. The RX 7900M delivers 38.52 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 77.05 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (at a 2:1 rate). The PRO V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS of FP32 and 27.65 TFLOPS of FP16 (at a 1:1 rate). The FP16 ratio difference is notable: the RX 7900M doubles its FP16 throughput, while the PRO V710 maintains a 1:1 ratio. The RX 7900M also has higher pixel rate at 401.3 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s, and higher texture rate at 601.9 GTexel/s versus 432.0 GTexel/s.

The API support is identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The release dates differ, with the RX 7900M released on 2023-10-18 and the PRO V710 released on 2024-10-02. The RX 7900M's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the PRO V710's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega. The RX 7900M has a production status of Active, while the PRO V710's production status is not recorded in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7900M wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its most significant advantage is in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it leads by 392.5%. This makes it the clear choice for DirectX 12 gaming, real-time ray tracing, and any graphics-heavy workload that stresses the ROPs and shading units. Its 192 ROPs versus 96 on the PRO V710 mean it can rasterize at nearly double the pixel rate, which directly translates to higher frame rates in traditional rendering.

The RX 7900M also wins in Geekbench OpenCL, but by a narrower 11.2% margin. This suggests that for general-purpose compute, the PRO V710 is competitive. The PRO V710's architecture, with its 1:1 FP16 ratio, may actually be preferable for workloads that require symmetric FP16 and FP32 throughput. The RX 7900M's 2:1 FP16 ratio means it sacrifices FP16 rate when doing FP32 work, or vice versa depending on the workload.

The PRO V710 wins in memory capacity, offering 28 GB versus 16 GB. This is its primary advantage in the database. For users running large language models, big data analytics, or memory-intensive rendering scenes that exceed 16 GB, the PRO V710 is the only viable option between the two. The bandwidth difference is minor (504.0 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s), so the PRO V710 does not lose much in throughput while gaining significant capacity.

The power envelope slightly favors the PRO V710, with a 158 W TDP versus 180 W. However, the RX 7900M requires no external power connectors, making it easier to integrate into portable devices. The PRO V710 requires a single 8-pin connector and a 450 W power supply, which is a consideration for system builders. The PRO V710 has no display outputs, so it is strictly a compute or rendering accelerator, while the RX 7900M's outputs depend on the portable device it is integrated into.