AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X vs AMD Radeon PRO W7600 Comparison

# AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X

The benchmark data presents a narrow but clear divide between these two AMD workstation cards. In the only head-to-head test available, the Radeon PRO W7600 edges out the Radeon Pro Vega 64X in Geekbench OpenCL by 3.9%, scoring 81,528 against 78,467. That 3.9% margin is modest, yet it aligns with the aggregate picture: the W7600 posts an average benchmark score of 87,108 across all tests, while the Vega 64X averages 80,959. The W7600 also holds a one-point advantage in the win column (1–0) and sits at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs compared to the Vega 64X's 92nd. These are close scores, but the direction is consistent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison — Geekbench OpenCL — shows the W7600 winning with 81,528 points versus 78,467 for the Vega 64X, a delta of 3.9%. This is not a landslide; it is the kind of margin that could flip with driver updates or workload variations. However, the W7600's advantage is not isolated to that one test. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 92,688 is substantially higher than any score the Vega 64X can offer, since the Vega 64X has no Vulkan result in the data. Conversely, the Vega 64X has a Geekbench Metal score of 83,450, a test the W7600 does not appear in. So while the direct comparison is narrow, the W7600's other benchmark implies a wider gap in compute-heavy APIs.

Look at the rival context for each card. The W7600's average score of 87,108 places it within 0.4% of the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87,445) and 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134) by 4.4% and the desktop RTX A4500 (91,671) by 5%. The Vega 64X, with its 80,959 average, is 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 (81,995), 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 (79,842), 1.7% ahead of the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605), and 2% ahead of the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396). The W7600 thus competes in a higher performance tier than the Vega 64X, even though the delta between the two cards themselves is small.

What does a 3.9% OpenCL win mean in practice? For OpenCL-heavy workloads, the W7600 should complete tasks marginally faster. But the data also suggests the W7600's real strength lies in Vulkan, where its 92,688 score is 13.7% higher than its own OpenCL result. The Vega 64X has no Vulkan data, so its Vulkan capability is unquantified. This asymmetry is the most striking finding: the newer card is not just faster; it is faster in a different API profile.

Architecture Differences

The underlying architectures explain much of the performance split. The W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish," fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Vega 64X uses the Vega 10 chip on the older GCN 5.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node difference alone — 6 nm versus 14 nm — is a generational leap, and it shows in transistor density: the W7600 packs 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter across a 204 mm² die, totaling 13,300 million transistors. The Vega 64X has a much larger 495 mm² die but only 25.3 million transistors per square millimeter, for 12,500 million total. The W7600 crams more transistors into less than half the silicon area.

Core counts tell a more nuanced story. The Vega 64X has 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The W7600 has half the shading units (2,048) and half the TMUs (128), but matches the 64 ROPs. The Vega 64X also has no ray tracing cores, while the W7600 includes 32 RT cores. Clock speeds invert the core count advantage: the W7600 runs at a 1720 MHz base and 2440 MHz boost, versus 1250 MHz base and 1468 MHz boost for the Vega 64X. Higher clocks on fewer cores yield the W7600's 19.99 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, far ahead of the Vega 64X's 12.03 TFLOPS. The FP16 story is similar: 39.98 TFLOPS versus 24.05 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Memory is where the Vega 64X fights back. It offers 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 288.0 GB/s. That is a 224 GB/s bandwidth deficit for the W7600, and double the VRAM for the Vega 64X. The Vega 64X's memory clock is just 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), while the W7600's memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), but the bus width difference is decisive. Pixel rate favors the W7600 at 156.2 GPixel/s versus 93.95 GPixel/s, but texture rate favors the Vega 64X at 375.8 GTexel/s versus 312.3 GTexel/s. The architectures are clearly optimized differently: RDNA 3.0 pushes raw compute and pixel throughput; GCN 5.0 leans on massive memory bandwidth and texture throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The W7600 wins in compute throughput, pixel fill, and modern API support. Its 19.99 TFLOPS FP32 is 66% higher than the Vega 64X's 12.03 TFLOPS. Its 156.2 GPixel/s pixel rate beats 93.95 GPixel/s by a wide margin. The W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 64X tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. The W7600 also has 32 ray tracing cores, which the Vega 64X lacks entirely. For OpenCL, the W7600's 81,528 score beats the Vega 64X's 78,467. For Vulkan, the W7600's 92,688 score is its best result, suggesting strong performance in Vulkan-based rendering or compute workloads.

The Vega 64X wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 16 GB of HBM2 is double the W7600's 8 GB, and its 512.0 GB/s bandwidth is 78% higher than the W7600's 288.0 GB/s. It also has a higher texture rate (375.8 GTexel/s versus 312.3 GTexel/s) and more shading units (4,096 versus 2,048). In the Geekbench Metal test, the Vega 64X scores 83,450, which is higher than its OpenCL result and suggests strong performance in Apple's Metal API. The Vega 64X is also an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and a 250 W TDP, while the W7600 is a single-slot card requiring a 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Use-case splits follow these strengths. For compute-heavy tasks that rely on FP32 throughput — such as certain simulation, AI inference, or rendering workloads — the W7600 is the clear choice. For tasks that are memory-bandwidth bound or require more than 8 GB of VRAM — such as large dataset processing, high-resolution texture work, or multi-model loading — the Vega 64X has a structural advantage. The Vega 64X's 16 GB capacity is particularly relevant for workloads that exceed the W7600's 8 GB limit. The W7600's ray tracing cores make it the only option for hardware-accelerated ray tracing, though neither card's benchmark data directly measures that feature.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the faster card overall. Its 87,108 average benchmark score beats the Vega 64X's 80,959 by 7.6%. It wins the only direct head-to-head test, posts a higher percentile rank (93 versus 92), and offers significantly higher compute throughput (19.99 TFLOPS versus 12.03 TFLOPS FP32). The W7600 also brings modern features — ray tracing, DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and DisplayPort 2.1 outputs — that the Vega 64X cannot match. It is an active product with a launch MSRP of 599 USD, compared to the Vega 64X's end-of-life status.

But the Vega 64X is not obsolete for every scenario. Its 16 GB of HBM2 memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth are superior to the W7600's 8 GB and 288.0 GB/s. For workloads that saturate memory capacity or bandwidth, the Vega 64X could outperform the W7600 despite its lower compute throughput. The Vega 64X's 83,450 Metal score also indicates strong macOS performance, while the W7600 has no Metal data. If your work is memory-bound or Mac-centric, the Vega 64X remains relevant. If your work is compute-bound, ray-traced, or Windows/Linux-based, the W7600 is the data-backed choice.

The 3.9% OpenCL delta is close enough that real-world differences may be negligible for some tasks. But the W7600's 92,688 Vulkan score — 13.7% above its own OpenCL result — suggests that in Vulkan-heavy environments, the W7600's advantage could be much larger than the head-to-head implies. The Vega 64X has no Vulkan data, so its Vulkan performance is an unknown. That unknown is a risk for Vega 64X buyers. The W7600's higher clock speeds, newer architecture, and ray tracing support make it the more future-proof choice.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the direct OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 81,528 versus 78,467 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X, a 3.9% advantage.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The W7600 averages 87,108 across all benchmarks, while the Vega 64X averages 80,959. That is a 7.6% gap in favor of the W7600.

Q: Does the Vega 64X have any memory advantage?

A: Yes. The Vega 64X has 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s for the W7600.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the W7600 has ray tracing cores — 32 of them. The Vega 64X has no RT cores listed.

Q: What are the API support differences?

A: The W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vega 64X supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Is the Vega 64X still in production?

A: No. The Vega 64X is listed as end-of-life, while the W7600 is an active product with a launch MSRP of 599 USD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7600 | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Navi 33 | Vega 10 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1720 MHz | 1250 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2440 MHz | 1468 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 128 | 256 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 32 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 156.2 GPixel/s | 93.95 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 312.3 GTexel/s | 375.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 19.99 TFLOPS | 12.03 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) | 24.05 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 130 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-08-02 | 2019-03-18 |

| OpenCL Score | 81,528 | 78,467 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 87,108 | 80,959 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 93 | 92 |