AMD Radeon Pro VII vs NVIDIA Quadro GP100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro VII and NVIDIA Quadro GP100 are two end-of-life professional workstation graphics cards that target similar high-end compute workloads but approach them from fundamentally different architectural eras. The data shows a remarkably close contest, with the Radeon Pro VII holding a narrow but consistent edge in the available benchmark results. Both cards sit at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, indicating they are firmly in the upper echelon of performance, yet their design philosophies and technical specifications reveal distinct strengths that matter depending on the specific task at hand.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon Pro VII scores 90,148 against the NVIDIA Quadro GP100’s 88,528. This gives AMD a 1.8% victory in that specific test, a margin that is statistically significant but not transformative. Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Radeon Pro VII posts 88,961, which is just 0.5% higher than the Quadro GP100’s 88,528. In practical terms, this means the two cards are nearly interchangeable for raw compute throughput in this particular workload, though the AMD card does hold the advantage.

The Radeon Pro VII also has a second benchmark result, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 87,774, which shows its API versatility. The Quadro GP100 does not have a corresponding Vulkan score in the data, so a direct comparison cannot be made there. However, the presence of a strong Vulkan result for AMD suggests that its architecture handles modern, lower-level graphics APIs effectively. When placed against the broader field, the Radeon Pro VII trails the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile by 2.4% and the AMD Radeon RX 7900M by 3%, but it leads the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 by 3.6%. The Quadro GP100, meanwhile, is 2.9% behind the RTX A4500 Mobile, 3.1% ahead of the Radeon PRO W7600, and 3.4% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX. These deltas place both cards in a tight competitive cluster where small architectural preferences can flip the outcome.

Architecture Differences

The core divergence lies in the manufacturing process and transistor budgets. The AMD Radeon Pro VII uses a 7 nm process at TSMC, packing 13,230 million transistors onto a 331 mm² die, achieving a density of 40.0 million transistors per square millimeter. In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 uses a 16 nm process, also at TSMC, but crams 15,300 million transistors onto a much larger 610 mm² die, with a lower density of 25.1 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a classic trade-off: AMD’s newer node allows for a smaller, denser chip, while NVIDIA’s older node requires significantly more silicon area. The Radeon Pro VII is built on GCN 5.1 architecture (Vega 20), while the Quadro GP100 is based on Pascal, representing two very different design eras.

Memory configurations are superficially similar—both have 16 GB of HBM2 with a 4096-bit bus—but the speeds differ substantially. The Radeon Pro VII runs its memory at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), yielding a massive 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro GP100 operates at 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective), producing 732.2 GB/s. This 39% bandwidth advantage for AMD is one of the most significant separators in the entire specification sheet, likely benefiting memory-intensive compute tasks like large data set processing. The Radeon Pro VII also features a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Quadro GP100 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16, giving the AMD card double the interconnector bandwidth for data transfers to the host system.

Compute unit counts follow a similar pattern. The Radeon Pro VII has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro GP100 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. AMD leads in shading and texturing capabilities, while NVIDIA has 50% more ROPs, which affects pixel fill rate. Indeed, the Quadro GP100 achieves a pixel rate of 138.5 GPixel/s versus the Radeon Pro VII’s 108.8 GPixel/s, a 27% advantage for NVIDIA. However, the texture rate tells the opposite story: AMD posts 408.0 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA’s 323.2 GTexel/s, a 26% lead for AMD. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, so this is purely a rasterization and compute comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro VII delivers 13.06 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 26% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro GP100’s 10.34 TFLOPS. This is a direct consequence of AMD’s higher clock speeds and shading unit count.

Q: Is the memory bandwidth difference significant?

A: Yes, it is substantial. The Radeon Pro VII provides 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth compared to the Quadro GP100’s 732.2 GB/s. This 39% advantage could heavily influence workloads that saturate memory, such as large matrix operations or high-resolution image processing.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern APIs?

A: The data shows they are identical in API support. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. This means software compatibility is not a differentiator between them.

Q: What about the physical size and power requirements?

A: The Radeon Pro VII is longer at 305 mm (12 inches) versus the Quadro GP100’s 267 mm (10.5 inches), but both are dual-slot and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall. The AMD card has a higher TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W PSU with dual connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin), while the Quadro GP100 has a 235 W TDP, a 550 W PSU recommendation, and uses only a single 8-pin connector.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 wins this metric with 138.5 GPixel/s, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro VII’s 108.8 GPixel/s. This is due to NVIDIA’s higher ROP count of 96 versus AMD’s 64.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life products. The AMD card was released on 2020-05-12, while the NVIDIA card is much older, with a release date of 2016-09-30.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two cards differ, excluding identical specs like memory size, bus width, slot width, and API support.

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro VII | NVIDIA Quadro GP100 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | GCN 5.1 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 13,230 million | 15,300 million |

| Die Size | 331 mm² | 610 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.0M / mm² | 25.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1400 MHz | 1304 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1700 MHz | 1443 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.02 TB/s | 732.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3840 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 240 | 224 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 108.8 GPixel/s | 138.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 408.0 GTexel/s | 323.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 13.06 TFLOPS | 10.34 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 26.11 TFLOPS (2:1) | 20.69 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 235 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 550 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | 305 mm (12 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Release Date | 2020-05-12 | 2016-09-30 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Polaris | Quadro Maxwell |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Navi | Quadro Volta |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro VII is the clear winner in compute-heavy tasks that leverage raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 26% higher FP32 performance and 39% higher memory bandwidth make it a compelling choice for scientific simulation, machine learning inference, or any workload where data movement and arithmetic intensity are paramount. The PCIe 4.0 interface further enhances its appeal for tasks that require frequent host-device data exchanges, such as real-time data streaming or multi-GPU configurations. The 6x mini-DisplayPort outputs also provide exceptional multi-monitor flexibility for visualization clusters.

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100, despite being older and slower in raw compute, has its own niches. Its 50% higher ROP count and 27% higher pixel rate make it superior for traditional rasterization-heavy tasks, such as high-resolution 3D rendering or complex scene composition where fill rate is the bottleneck. The lower TDP of 235 W and single 8-pin power connector make it easier to integrate into existing workstations without power supply upgrades. Its single DVI port is a legacy convenience for older displays, and the shorter 267 mm length improves compatibility with smaller chassis. For users on a pre-existing PCIe 3.0 platform, the lack of PCIe 4.0 support on NVIDIA’s card is moot.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Radeon Pro VII is the more powerful card for general compute, winning the only head-to-head benchmark and leading in average score by 0.5%. Its advantages in FP32/FP16 throughput, memory bandwidth, and a newer PCIe interface make it the superior choice for compute-centric professional workloads like data analytics, engineering simulation, and GPU-accelerated rendering. The 1.8% OpenCL victory, while narrow, is consistent with the overall trend of AMD’s higher clock speeds and shading unit count.

However, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 should not be dismissed. It wins decisively in pixel fill rate and offers a more power-efficient package (235 W vs 250 W) with a smaller physical footprint. For users whose primary tasks are rasterization-bound or who have strict power and space constraints, the Quadro GP100 remains a viable option. The choice ultimately hinges on whether the user prioritizes compute throughput and bandwidth (choose AMD) or pixel processing and power efficiency (choose NVIDIA). Given the data, the Radeon Pro VII is the default recommendation for most modern professional workloads, but the Quadro GP100’s specific strengths in fill-rate-heavy applications cannot be overlooked.