AMD Radeon Pro VII vs AMD Radeon PRO W7700 Comparison

# AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs AMD Radeon Pro VII

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and AMD Radeon Pro VII represent two distinct eras of AMD workstation graphics. The W7700, built on RDNA 3.0, decisively outperforms the older GCN 5.1-based Pro VII in every shared benchmark, delivering a 20.1% lead in OpenCL and a 39.7% lead in Vulkan. The Pro VII, however, retains a unique advantage in its HBM2 memory subsystem and legacy API support, making it a niche choice for specific workflows. The data shows a clear generational shift, with the W7700 offering superior raw compute and modern features.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 scores 118,976 on average, while the AMD Radeon Pro VII scores 97,131. This places the W7700 in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the Pro VII's 93rd percentile.

Q: How much faster is the W7700 in Vulkan performance?

A: The W7700 achieves a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,706 versus the Pro VII's 92,862. This represents a 39.7% advantage for the W7700, the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark.

Q: Does the Pro VII have any memory bandwidth advantage?

A: Yes, the Pro VII features 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. The W7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing 576.0 GB/s — roughly half the Pro VII's bandwidth.

Q: What are the process node differences?

A: The W7700 is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Pro VII uses a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. This contributes to the W7700's higher transistor density of 81.2M per mm² versus 40.0M per mm² for the Pro VII.

Q: Which card supports newer display outputs?

A: The W7700 features 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, whereas the Pro VII offers 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The W7700's DisplayPort 2.1 standard is newer and supports higher bandwidth per connection.

Q: Is the Pro VII still in production?

A: No, the Pro VII is marked as "End-of-life" in the data. The W7700 has no production status listed, but its release date of November 2023 indicates it is a current product.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename "Wheat Nas" and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. In contrast, the Pro VII uses the Vega 20 chip based on the older GCN 5.1 architecture, part of the Radeon Pro Vega (Vega II Series).

The manufacturing process highlights the generational leap. The W7700 is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, packing 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The Pro VII, built on a 7 nm process, contains only 13,230 million transistors on a slightly smaller 331 mm² die, resulting in a density of 40.0M per mm². The W7700 crams more than twice the transistors into a comparable physical footprint.

Shader configuration differs significantly. The W7700 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The Pro VII actually has more shading units (3,840) and TMUs (240), but fewer ROPs (64). This inversion explains why the W7700 achieves higher pixel rates despite fewer shaders — its RDNA 3.0 architecture processes pixels more efficiently per ROP.

The W7700 introduces dedicated ray tracing cores (48 RT cores), a feature entirely absent from the Pro VII. Both cards lack tensor cores. In terms of API support, the W7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Pro VII is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 — a full feature tier lower in DirectX and one minor version behind in Vulkan.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The W7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro VII uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a massive 4096-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s — nearly double the bandwidth. However, the W7700's memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus the Pro VII's 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), showing how the W7700 compensates with higher clock speeds.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clean sweep for the W7700 across both shared tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the W7700 scores 108,245 against the Pro VII's 90,148, yielding a 20.1% advantage. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the W7700's RDNA 3.0 architecture delivers significantly better raw compute throughput despite having fewer shading units on paper.

The Vulkan results are even more lopsided. The W7700 achieves 129,706, while the Pro VII manages only 92,862 — a 39.7% gap. This near-40% difference suggests that the W7700's newer architecture handles Vulkan's modern driver overhead and parallel workloads far more efficiently. The Pro VII's GCN 5.1 architecture, designed for an earlier era of graphics APIs, struggles to extract performance from Vulkan's explicit control model.

Notably, the Pro VII has a third benchmark, Geekbench Metal, where it scores 108,383. The W7700 has no Metal benchmark listed, so direct comparison in Apple's API isn't possible from this data. However, the Pro VII's Metal score closely matches the W7700's OpenCL score, suggesting the Pro VII remains competitive in Apple-centric workflows.

Contextualizing these scores against the nearest rivals provides additional perspective. The W7700's average score of 118,976 places 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 Pro VII's average of 97,131 sits 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7900M, 5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60, 4.7% behind the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000, and 6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards:

• Chip: Navi 32 (W7700) vs Vega 20 (Pro VII)
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 vs GCN 5.1
• Process Node: 5 nm vs 7 nm
• Transistors: 28,100 million vs 13,230 million
• Die Size: 346 mm² vs 331 mm²
• Transistor Density: 81.2M / mm² vs 40.0M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1900 MHz vs 1400 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2600 MHz vs 1700 MHz
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) vs 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective)
• Memory Type: GDDR6 vs HBM2
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit vs 4096 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 576.0 GB/s vs 1.02 TB/s
• Shading Units: 3072 vs 3840
• TMUs: 192 vs 240
• ROPs: 96 vs 64
• Ray Tracing Cores: 48 vs None
• Pixel Rate: 249.6 GPixel/s vs 108.8 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 499.2 GTexel/s vs 408.0 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 31.95 TFLOPS vs 13.06 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 63.90 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 26.11 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 190 W vs 250 W
• Power Connectors: 1x 8-pin vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 450 W vs 600 W
• Display Outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 vs 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 vs 1.3
• Dimensions (Length): 241 mm (9.5 inches) vs 305 mm (12 inches)
• Release Date: 2023-11-12 vs 2020-05-12
• Launch MSRP: 999 USD vs 1,899 USD
• Production Status: N/A vs End-of-life
• Successor: N/A vs Radeon Pro Navi

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon PRO W7700 wins on: The W7700 dominates in compute performance, with FP32 throughput of 31.95 TFLOPS versus the Pro VII's 13.06 TFLOPS — a 145% advantage. Its FP16 performance of 63.90 TFLOPS similarly crushes the Pro VII's 26.11 TFLOPS. In practical terms, the W7700 is better suited for GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, and machine learning inference where raw FLOPs translate directly to reduced computation time.

The W7700 also wins on power efficiency. Despite delivering over twice the FP32 performance, it consumes only 190 W TDP versus the Pro VII's 250 W. The suggested PSU requirement drops from 600 W to 450 W, and the power connector simplifies from a 6-pin + 8-pin combo to a single 8-pin. This makes the W7700 easier to integrate into existing workstations without PSU upgrades.

Modern display support is another clear win. The 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs support higher resolutions and refresh rates than the 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on the Pro VII. For professionals driving high-density multi-monitor setups or high-bandwidth displays, the W7700 is the forward-looking choice.

AMD Radeon Pro VII wins on: The Pro VII's HBM2 memory provides 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth, which is 77% higher than the W7700's 576.0 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth-bound — such as large dataset processing, certain scientific simulations, or in-memory databases — the Pro VII's memory subsystem can offset some of its compute deficit. This is its single most compelling technical advantage.

The Pro VII also offers six display outputs versus four on the W7700, which matters for extreme multi-monitor configurations. Its longer 305 mm PCB (versus 241 mm) may be beneficial for specific chassis airflow or mounting scenarios, though it requires more case clearance.

The Pro VII's Metal benchmark score of 108,383 indicates strong macOS compatibility, whereas the W7700 has no Metal data available. For users running in Apple environments, the Pro VII may be the safer bet despite its age.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is the superior GPU for virtually all modern workstation workloads. Its 20.1% OpenCL and 39.7% Vulkan advantages over the Pro VII reflect a generational leap in architecture efficiency. The W7700 delivers 145% more FP32 compute, supports ray tracing, consumes 24% less power, and comes in a smaller physical footprint. Its 95th percentile ranking versus the Pro VII's 93rd confirms its higher standing among all GPUs.

The Pro VII's only real technical edge is memory bandwidth, where its HBM2 stack doubles the W7700's throughput. This makes it viable for niche memory-bound applications that cannot leverage the W7700's superior compute or modern APIs. Its Metal performance also suggests continued relevance in Apple-centric workflows, though the card is end-of-life and its successor (the Radeon Pro Navi series) has already arrived.

For most buyers, the choice is clear: the W7700 offers better performance, modern features, lower power draw, and a more compact design. The Pro VII's legacy memory architecture and additional display outputs serve a shrinking audience. Anyone building or upgrading a workstation today should choose the W7700 unless their specific workload is dominated by memory bandwidth and their software stack relies on the Pro VII's older API support. The benchmark data does not support choosing the Pro VII for general-purpose professional graphics work.