AMD Radeon Pro Vega II vs AMD Radeon PRO W7600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear but nuanced picture of these two AMD professional GPUs. In the shared Geekbench tests, the older Radeon Pro Vega II dominates, winning both available comparisons. The most significant gap appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the Pro Vega II scores 99,048 against the PRO W7600’s 81,528. That is a 21.5% advantage for the Vega II, a substantial margin that places it firmly ahead in compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL. The Vulkan results are closer but still favor the veteran card: the Pro Vega II scores 99,621 versus 92,688 for the PRO W7600, a 7.5% lead. While the Vulkan gap is smaller, it remains consistent, indicating that the Vega II holds an advantage across both major cross-platform APIs tested.

It is worth contextualizing these scores against each card’s broader competitive standing. The Pro Vega II’s average benchmark score of 109,617 places it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the PRO W7600’s average of 87,108 sits just one percentile lower at 93. Despite the older card’s outright wins in the head-to-head, the overall averages suggest they occupy a similar tier in the wider GPU landscape. The Pro Vega II’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon PRO W7900, which scores 110,725, a delta of -1%, meaning the Vega II is essentially trading blows with a much newer flagship. The PRO W7600’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87,445, a delta of -0.4%, showing it is squarely in the same performance class as that professional card.

The data suggests a generational paradox. The Pro Vega II, released in 2019, outperforms the 2023 PRO W7600 in both shared tests. This is likely due to the Vega II’s massive 4096 shading units and 4096-bit memory bus, which provide raw throughput that the newer but smaller Navi 33 chip cannot match in these particular API workloads. However, the PRO W7600 is not without merit; its boost clock of 2440 MHz is significantly higher than the Vega II’s 1720 MHz, and its peak FP32 throughput of 19.99 TFLOPS exceeds the Vega II’s 14.09 TFLOPS. Yet, the actual benchmark results show that theoretical peak performance does not always translate to real-world API scores, as the Vega II’s wider memory subsystem and higher shading unit count win the day in OpenCL and Vulkan.

Where Each One Wins

Looking strictly at the benchmark wins, the Radeon Pro Vega II is the clear victor, taking both available tests. Its 21.5% lead in OpenCL is particularly pronounced, making it the obvious choice for professionals whose workflows rely heavily on OpenCL acceleration—think compute simulations, certain rendering engines, or scientific analysis tools that favor this API. The 7.5% Vulkan win also gives it an edge in Vulkan-based applications, which are becoming more common in modern game engines and real-time visualization tools. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in these specific APIs, the data unequivocally points to the Pro Vega II.

The PRO W7600, despite losing both head-to-head tests, has its own areas of strength that are not captured in the shared benchmark suite. Its FP32 compute rating of 19.99 TFLOPS is 41.8% higher than the Vega II’s 14.09 TFLOPS, suggesting that in workloads optimized for pure FP32 math—such as certain AI inference or physics simulations—the newer card could potentially outperform. Additionally, its pixel rate of 156.2 GPixel/s is 41.9% higher than the Vega II’s 110.1 GPixel/s, indicating superior rasterization throughput for graphics-heavy tasks that are not measured by Geekbench. The PRO W7600 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and has 32 dedicated ray tracing cores, features entirely absent from the Vega II, which only supports DirectX 12 (12_1) with no ray tracing hardware. For modern gaming or real-time ray-traced visualization workloads, the PRO W7600 is architecturally better equipped, even if the legacy benchmark scores do not reflect it.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this split. The Pro Vega II’s average of 109,617 is 25.7% higher than the PRO W7600’s 87,108, confirming its overall superiority in the measured tests. However, the PRO W7600’s 93rd percentile ranking, only one point below the Vega II, shows that it is not far behind in the broader GPU hierarchy. The verdict is that the Vega II wins on raw legacy API performance, while the PRO W7600 wins on modern feature support and theoretical compute density.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark, representing two distinct eras of AMD GPU design. The Radeon Pro Vega II is built on the Vega 20 chip using the GCN 5.1 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It packs 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 40.0M / mm². In contrast, the Radeon PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip with the RDNA 3.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a newer 6 nm process. It contains 13,300 million transistors—remarkably similar to the Vega II—but on a much smaller 204 mm² die, yielding a density of 65.2M / mm². This 63% higher transistor density highlights the efficiency gains of the newer fabrication process and architecture.

Memory architecture is where the two diverge most dramatically. The Pro Vega II features 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, delivering a staggering 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The PRO W7600, by contrast, uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s. The Vega II’s bandwidth advantage is 186.6% higher, a critical factor in memory-bound workloads. However, the PRO W7600 compensates with a much higher memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus the Vega II’s 806 MHz (1612 Mbps effective), though the narrow bus limits its practical throughput.

Compute unit configurations also tell a story of different design philosophies. The Vega II has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. The PRO W7600 has exactly half the shading units (2048) and half the TMUs (128), but retains 64 ROPs. This reduction in shading units is offset by higher clocks and architectural efficiency in RDNA 3.0. The Vega II’s texture rate is 440.3 GTexel/s versus the PRO W7600’s 312.3 GTexel/s, a 41% advantage for the older card. The PRO W7600, however, has a higher pixel rate at 156.2 GPixel/s compared to 110.1 GPixel/s for the Vega II.

Feature support is a clear generational improvement for the PRO W7600. It includes 32 ray tracing cores, while the Vega II has none. The PRO W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Vega II only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The bus interfaces also differ: the Vega II uses the proprietary Apple MPX form factor, while the PRO W7600 uses standard PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are another differentiator, with the Vega II offering 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt, while the PRO W7600 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The Vega II is a quad-slot card with a 475 W TDP, while the PRO W7600 is a single-slot card with a 130 W TDP, making it far more energy-efficient and physically practical.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the choice between these two cards depends entirely on workload priorities and system constraints. For users who rely on OpenCL or Vulkan-based applications, the Radeon Pro Vega II is the superior performer, with a 21.5% lead in OpenCL and a 7.5% lead in Vulkan. Its 32 GB of HBM2 memory and 825.3 GB/s bandwidth make it ideally suited for large datasets, high-resolution textures, or compute tasks that require massive memory pools. The 94th percentile ranking and an average score of 109,617, which rivals the much newer AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (delta -1%), solidify its position as a high-end compute solution. However, its 475 W TDP, quad-slot form factor, and Apple MPX bus interface limit it to specific workstation configurations, primarily Apple Mac Pro systems. It is also end-of-life, which may concern long-term support.

The Radeon PRO W7600, despite losing the benchmark comparisons, is the more versatile and modern card. Its 130 W TDP, single-slot design, and standard PCIe 4.0 x8 interface make it easy to integrate into a wide range of PC builds. It offers ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, making it a better fit for contemporary graphics workloads, real-time visualization, or gaming-adjacent professional tasks. Its higher FP32 throughput (19.99 TFLOPS) and pixel rate (156.2 GPixel/s) suggest untapped potential in applications that leverage these capabilities. The 93rd percentile ranking, with an average score of 87,108, places it within striking distance of the Vega II despite the head-to-head losses. For professionals prioritizing efficiency, modern features, and ease of deployment, the PRO W7600 is the logical pick.

Strictly from the benchmark data, the Vega II is the faster card in the tested APIs. But for new system builds or users needing ray tracing and modern API support, the PRO W7600 offers a more future-proof feature set. The 32 GB memory capacity of the Vega II is a decisive factor for AI training or massive simulations; the 8 GB on the PRO W7600 may be a limiting constraint in such scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II has an average benchmark score of 109,617, which is 25.7% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7600’s average of 87,108.

Q: What is the performance difference in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega II scores 99,048, which is 21.5% higher than the PRO W7600’s score of 81,528.

Q: Does the Radeon PRO W7600 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the PRO W7600 includes 32 ray tracing cores, while the Radeon Pro Vega II has no ray tracing cores.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The Pro Vega II has a memory bandwidth of 825.3 GB/s, which is 186.6% higher than the PRO W7600’s 288.0 GB/s.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Pro Vega II has a TDP of 475 W, while the PRO W7600 has a TDP of 130 W. The suggested power supply is 850 W for the Vega II and 300 W for the PRO W7600.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The PRO W7600 has a pixel rate of 156.2 GPixel/s, which is 41.9% higher than the Pro Vega II’s 110.1 GPixel/s.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega II | AMD Radeon PRO W7600 |

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

| Chip | Vega 20 | Navi 33 |

| Architecture | GCN 5.1 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 13,230 million | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | 331 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.0M / mm² | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1574 MHz | 1720 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1720 MHz | 2440 MHz |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 4096 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 825.3 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 256 | 128 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 110.1 GPixel/s | 156.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 440.3 GTexel/s | 312.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 14.09 TFLOPS | 19.99 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1) | 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 475 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Quad-slot | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 850 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 |

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

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2019-06-02 | 2023-08-02 |

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

| Launch MSRP | 2,199 USD | 599 USD |