AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 and AMD Radeon Pro W5500X are both end-of-life workstation graphics cards, but they occupy different tiers of performance and capability. The RTX 8000 is built on NVIDIA’s 12 nm Turing architecture with a TU102 chip, while the W5500X uses AMD’s 7 nm RDNA 1.0 architecture with a Navi 14 chip. Their average benchmark scores place them within 1.6% of each other, yet the underlying specifications and API support reveal stark contrasts. The RTX 8000 delivers 16.31 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the W5500X offers 5.398 TFLOPS FP32 and 8 GB of GDDR6. These differences shape their respective roles in professional workloads, and the data below examines how they compare directly.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list between these two cards is empty, meaning no direct comparative tests were recorded in the database. However, the individual benchmark results and average scores provide a clear picture of their relative standing. The RTX 8000 has an average benchmark score of 28,421, while the W5500X averages 27,973. This puts the RTX 8000 approximately 1.6% ahead of the W5500X in aggregate performance. In terms of global percentile ranking, the RTX 8000 sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the W5500X is at the 73rd percentile, a marginal difference of one percentile point.

Looking at specific tests, the RTX 8000 shows its strength in compute-oriented workloads. It scores 101,883 in Geekbench OpenCL and 122,637 in Geekbench Vulkan. The W5500X has only one recorded benchmark: Geekbench Metal, where it scores 27,973. This is a significant gap, but the tests are not directly comparable because Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan are cross-platform APIs, while Metal is Apple-specific. The RTX 8000’s Passmark scores further illustrate its compute capabilities: 19,799 in G3D, 9,992 in GPU Compute, and 866 in G2D. It also scores 211 in DirectX 9, 188 in DirectX 11, 137 in DirectX 10, and 79 in DirectX 12. The W5500X has no Passmark results in the data, so direct comparisons in those legacy API tests are impossible.

The nearest rival data provides context for both cards. The RTX 8000’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R9 M295X, which averages 28,580, putting the RTX 8000 0.6% behind. The AMD FirePro S7150 (28,117) is 1.1% slower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28,020) is 1.4% slower. The AMD Radeon RX 570 (28,766) is 1.2% faster. For the W5500X, the nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28,020), which is 0.2% faster. The AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27,883) is 0.3% slower, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839) is 0.5% slower. The AMD FirePro S7150 (28,117) is 0.5% faster. This data suggests both cards perform in the same general bandwidth, with the RTX 8000 holding a slight edge in aggregate.

The RTX 8000’s advantage is most pronounced in raw compute throughput. Its 16.31 TFLOPS FP32 is roughly three times the W5500X’s 5.398 TFLOPS. Similarly, the RTX 8000’s texture rate of 509.8 GTexel/s dwarfs the W5500X’s 168.7 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 169.9 GPixel/s is more than triple the W5500X’s 56.22 GPixel/s. These are not just numerical gaps; they represent real differences in how quickly each card can process geometry, shaders, and texture data. For workloads that scale with shading units and TMUs, the RTX 8000 is in a different class. The W5500X, however, counters with a much smaller footprint: a 125 W TDP versus the RTX 8000’s 260 W, and a suggested PSU of 300 W versus 600 W.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 has an average benchmark score of 28,421, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X’s 27,973. The RTX 8000 also holds a 74th percentile ranking versus the W5500X’s 73rd.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The RTX 8000 features 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W5500X has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s. This is a six-fold difference in capacity and a three-fold difference in bandwidth.

Q: What are the FP32 performance levels for each card?

A: The RTX 8000 achieves 16.31 TFLOPS FP32, while the W5500X reaches 5.398 TFLOPS FP32. The RTX 8000 is approximately three times faster in single-precision compute.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX versions?

A: No. The RTX 8000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the process node and transistor count for each?

A: The RTX 8000 uses a 12 nm process with 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die. The W5500X uses a 7 nm process with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die. The W5500X has a much higher transistor density at 40.5M / mm² versus 24.7M / mm².

Q: Which card has ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX 8000 includes these features, with 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. The W5500X has no RT cores or tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is substantial. The RTX 8000 is built on NVIDIA’s Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It houses 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.7M / mm². The W5500X uses AMD’s RDNA 1.0 architecture, also from TSMC, but on a 7 nm process. It contains 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 40.5M / mm². The smaller, denser die of the W5500X is a hallmark of the newer process node, but the RTX 8000 compensates with far more silicon area and transistor count.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The RTX 8000 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The W5500X has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That is exactly three times fewer shading units, TMUs, and ROPs in the W5500X. The RTX 8000 also includes 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores, while the W5500X has none. These hardware blocks are essential for ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads, respectively, and their absence in the W5500X limits its applicability in those emerging fields.

Memory architecture further separates them. The RTX 8000 uses a 384-bit memory bus with 48 GB of GDDR6, while the W5500X uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB. Memory bandwidth is 672.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s. The RTX 8000’s larger bus and capacity are designed for massive datasets, such as full-scene rendering or large neural network models, whereas the W5500X’s smaller footprint suits lighter tasks. Both cards use GDDR6 at an effective 14 Gbps, but the bus width is the deciding factor in bandwidth.

Power and physical design also differ. The RTX 8000 has a 260 W TDP and requires a 600 W suggested PSU, with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors. It is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The W5500X has a 125 W TDP and a 300 W suggested PSU, with no power connectors listed. It is also dual-slot, but dimensions are not provided. The bus interface differs as well: the RTX 8000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the W5500X uses Apple MPX, indicating a design tailored for Mac Pro systems. Display outputs also diverge, with the RTX 8000 offering 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C, while the W5500X provides 2x HDMI 2.0b.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The RTX 8000 is the more powerful card in raw compute, memory capacity, and feature set. Its 16.31 TFLOPS FP32, 48 GB memory, and RT/tensor cores make it suitable for heavy 3D rendering, simulation, and AI inference. The W5500X, with 5.398 TFLOPS FP32 and 8 GB memory, is a lighter option for less demanding tasks. The average benchmark scores are close—28,421 versus 27,973—but this aggregate hides the RTX 8000’s advantages in memory-bound and compute-heavy workloads. The RTX 8000’s 74th percentile ranking, while only one point higher than the W5500X’s 73rd, suggests a slightly broader performance envelope.

For users who need to handle multi-GPU datasets or ray-traced scenes, the RTX 8000 is the only viable choice between these two, given its 48 GB VRAM and RT cores. The W5500X cannot match this capacity or feature set. However, the W5500X’s lower TDP (125 W versus 260 W) and smaller suggested PSU (300 W versus 600 W) make it more efficient per watt. Its Apple MPX interface and HDMI 2.0b outputs indicate it is built for Mac-based workflows, while the RTX 8000 is a general-purpose PCIe card. The choice depends on the platform and workload: the RTX 8000 for maximum compute and memory, the W5500X for integrated Mac systems with modest requirements.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 and AMD Radeon Pro W5500X:

• Architecture: Turing (RTX 8000) vs. RDNA 1.0 (W5500X)
• Process Node: 12 nm (RTX 8000) vs. 7 nm (W5500X)
• Transistors: 18,600 million (RTX 8000) vs. 6,400 million (W5500X)
• Die Size: 754 mm² (RTX 8000) vs. 158 mm² (W5500X)
• Transistor Density: 24.7M / mm² (RTX 8000) vs. 40.5M / mm² (W5500X)
• Base Clock: 1395 MHz (RTX 8000) vs. 1187 MHz (W5500X)
• Boost Clock: 1770 MHz (RTX 8000) vs. 1757 MHz (W5500X)
• Memory Size: 48 GB (RTX 8000) vs. 8 GB (W5500X)
• Memory Bus Width: 384 bit (RTX 8000) vs. 128 bit (W5500X)
• Memory Bandwidth: 672.0 GB/s (RTX 8000) vs. 224.0 GB/s (W5500X)
• Shading Units: 4608 (RTX 8000) vs. 1536 (W5500X)
• TMUs: 288 (RTX 8000) vs. 96 (W5500X)
• ROPs: 96 (RTX 8000) vs. 32 (W5500X)
• RT Cores: 72 (RTX 8000) vs. null (W5500X)
• Tensor Cores: 576 (RTX 8000) vs. null (W5500X)
• Pixel Rate: 169.9 GPixel/s (RTX 8000) vs. 56.22 GPixel/s (W5500X)
• Texture Rate: 509.8 GTexel/s (RTX 8000) vs. 168.7 GTexel/s (W5500X)
• FP32 Performance: 16.31 TFLOPS (RTX 8000) vs. 5.398 TFLOPS (W5500X)
• FP16 Performance: 32.62 TFLOPS (RTX 8000) vs. 10.80 TFLOPS (W5500X)
• TDP: 260 W (RTX 8000) vs. 125 W (W5500X)
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin (RTX 8000) vs. null (W5500X)
• Suggested PSU: 600 W (RTX 8000) vs. 300 W (W5500X)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 (RTX 8000) vs. Apple MPX (W5500X)
• Display Outputs: 4x DisplayPort 1.4a + 1x USB Type-C (RTX 8000) vs. 2x HDMI 2.0b (W5500X)
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) (RTX 8000) vs. 12 (12_1) (W5500X)
• Dimensions: 267 mm x 111 mm (RTX 8000) vs. null (W5500X)
• Launch MSRP: 9,999 USD (RTX 8000) vs. 599 USD (W5500X)
• Release Date: 2018-08-12 (RTX 8000) vs. 2019-12-10 (W5500X)