AMD Radeon Pro W5700 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 dominates the head-to-head comparison, winning 7 of 9 benchmark tests. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 counters with only 2 wins, though both of those are decisive in their respective categories. The most striking margin comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Quadro RTX 5000 scores 92,309 against the W5700's 70,706, a 23.4% advantage. That is the single largest gap in the entire comparison and signals a clear NVIDIA strength in compute-oriented graphics workloads.

DirectX performance also favors NVIDIA across the board. In Passmark DirectX 11, the Quadro RTX 5000 posts 140 versus 104 for the W5700, a 25.7% lead. Passmark DirectX 10 shows a similar pattern: 113 versus 88, a 22.1% margin. The DirectX 12 test is closer, with NVIDIA ahead 59 to 54, an 8.5% edge. Even in OpenCL, where AMD traditionally competes well, the Quadro RTX 5000 takes the win: 78,999 versus 74,613, a 5.6% margin. The overall 3D score in Passmark G3D also goes to NVIDIA: 15,616 versus 14,520, a 7% advantage. Compute performance is nearly identical, with the Quadro RTX 5000 edging ahead 6,525 to 6,495, a mere 0.5% difference.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700's wins are concentrated in legacy and 2D workloads. In Passmark DirectX 9, the W5700 scores 225 versus 195 for the Quadro RTX 5000, a 15.4% advantage. The 2D test shows an even larger gap: 899 versus 709, a 26.8% lead for AMD. These are meaningful margins, but they reflect older API paths and desktop composition tasks rather than modern rendering or compute scenarios.

The average benchmark score tells a more complex story. The W5700 has an avgBenchmarkScore of 25,726, placing it in the 71st percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro RTX 5000 has a lower avgBenchmarkScore of 21,629, sitting in the 67th percentile. This discrepancy arises because the average includes benchmarks beyond the head-to-head set, and the W5700's strong 2D and DirectX 9 results pull its mean upward. The nearest rivals for the W5700 include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile at 25,740 (0.1% ahead) and the AMD Radeon RX 6700M at 25,633 (0.4% behind). The Quadro RTX 5000's nearest rivals are lower-tier cards: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB at 21,856 (1% ahead) and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21,379 (1.2% behind). This places the two cards in different competitive neighborhoods despite their head-to-head results.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is the stronger card for modern 3D, graphics API, and compute workloads, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 excels in 2D and legacy DirectX 9 scenarios. For professionals running current CAD, DCC, or GPU-accelerated compute applications, the Quadro RTX 5000's 23.4% Vulkan lead, 25.7% DirectX 11 lead, and 22.1% DirectX 10 lead make it the default choice. Its 7% advantage in Passmark G3D reinforces this, as does the near-tie in compute where NVIDIA still comes out ahead.

The W5700 should be selected by users whose workflows depend heavily on 2D desktop rendering or older DirectX 9 applications. Its 26.8% 2D score advantage and 15.4% DirectX 9 lead are substantial, and its higher average benchmark score (25,726 versus 21,629) reflects broader overall strength across the full test suite. The percentile rankings support this: the W5700 sits at the 71st percentile of all GPUs versus 67th for the Quadro RTX 5000.

That said, the head-to-head count is decisive: 7 wins for NVIDIA, 2 for AMD. The Quadro RTX 5000 also offers double the memory (16 GB versus 8 GB), which matters for large datasets and multi-application workflows. The W5700's wins, while real, target a shrinking segment of professional workloads. The verdict from the recorded data: choose the Quadro RTX 5000 for compute and modern graphics, choose the W5700 for 2D-centric or legacy DirectX 9 workflows where its margins are largest.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 uses the Navi 10 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 41.0 million per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 chip on Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 13,600 million transistors across a much larger 545 mm² die, with a lower transistor density of 25.0 million per mm². The process node advantage is clear: AMD fits more transistors per area, while NVIDIA uses a larger, older-node die to achieve higher absolute transistor counts.

The compute configurations differ markedly. The W5700 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA also adds specialized hardware: 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the AMD card. These enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and tensor operations, respectively, which the W5700 cannot match. The clock speeds tell a nuanced story: the W5700 has a lower base clock at 1400 MHz but a higher boost clock at 1880 MHz, while the Quadro RTX 5000 runs at 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost. Despite the W5700's higher boost, the Quadro RTX 5000 achieves higher throughput in most tests due to its larger shader count.

Memory configurations are identical in type and bandwidth: both use GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The critical difference is capacity: the W5700 has 8 GB, while the Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB. This doubles the memory footprint for the NVIDIA card, a significant advantage for large scenes, multi-GPU rendering, or compute datasets. Pixel rates are close: 120.3 GPixel/s for AMD versus 116.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates favor NVIDIA: 348.5 GTexel/s versus 270.7 GTexel/s, reflecting its higher TMU count. FP32 performance also favors NVIDIA: 11.15 TFLOPS versus 8.663 TFLOPS. FP16 follows the same pattern: 22.30 TFLOPS versus 17.33 TFLOPS, both at 2:1 ratio.

Power and interface differences are notable. The W5700 has a 205 W TDP, while the Quadro RTX 5000 draws 230 W. Both are dual-slot cards with identical power connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin) and the same suggested PSU of 550 W. The bus interface differs: the W5700 supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro RTX 5000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs vary: the W5700 offers 5x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C, while the Quadro RTX 5000 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C. API support shows NVIDIA with a newer DirectX version: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1) for AMD. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 wins decisively in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 92,309 versus 70,706 for the AMD Radeon Pro W5700, a 23.4% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in 2D performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 leads Passmark G2D by a wide margin: 899 versus 709, a 26.8% advantage for AMD.

Q: Which card has more memory and does it matter?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6, double the 8 GB on the AMD Radeon Pro W5700. Both share the same 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, so the capacity difference is the key factor for large workloads.

Q: What is the DirectX 12 performance difference?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 59 in Passmark DirectX 12 versus 54 for the AMD Radeon Pro W5700, an 8.5% lead for NVIDIA.

Q: How close is compute performance?

A: Passmark GPU Compute scores are nearly identical: 6,525 for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 and 6,495 for the AMD Radeon Pro W5700, a 0.5% difference in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: Which card has a higher overall benchmark average?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 has an average benchmark score of 25,726, compared to 21,629 for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000. The W5700 also ranks higher at the 71st percentile of all GPUs versus 67th for the Quadro RTX 5000.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 wins in 2D and legacy DirectX 9 workloads. Its Passmark G2D score of 899 versus 709 is the largest margin of any test, a 26.8% lead. The DirectX 9 result is also strong: 225 versus 195, a 15.4% advantage. These wins suggest the W5700 is better suited for desktop composition, 2D CAD drafting, and applications that rely on older DirectX 9 rendering paths. Its higher average benchmark score (25,726) and 71st percentile ranking also make it the better overall performer across the full database test suite, even though it loses most head-to-head tests.

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 wins everywhere else. The Vulkan margin of 23.4% (92,309 versus 70,706) is its largest and points to strong compute and modern graphics API performance. DirectX 10 and 11 wins of 22.1% and 25.7% respectively cover the most common professional rendering paths. The DirectX 12 win of 8.5% and G3D win of 7% round out a comprehensive 3D advantage. The 0.5% compute edge, while small, still goes to NVIDIA. The 16 GB memory capacity, RT cores, and tensor cores make the Quadro RTX 5000 the choice for ray-traced rendering, AI-assisted workflows, and large data sets. For professionals running current-generation 3D applications, GPU compute, or any workload leveraging Vulkan or DirectX 11/12, the data favors NVIDIA without ambiguity.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specifications. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 uses the Navi 10 chip on RDNA 1.0 architecture with a 7 nm process, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 chip on Turing architecture with a 12 nm process. Transistor counts differ: 10,300 million for AMD versus 13,600 million for NVIDIA. Die size also differs significantly: 251 mm² for AMD versus 545 mm² for NVIDIA, yielding transistor densities of 41.0M/mm² and 25.0M/mm² respectively.

Clock speeds show a mixed picture: the W5700 has a 1400 MHz base and 1880 MHz boost, while the Quadro RTX 5000 runs at 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost. Memory capacity is the major difference: 8 GB on the W5700 versus 16 GB on the Quadro RTX 5000, both GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units favor NVIDIA: 3,072 versus 2,304. TMUs also favor NVIDIA: 192 versus 144. ROPs are equal at 64. The Quadro RTX 5000 adds 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, which the W5700 lacks entirely.

Pixel rates are close: 120.3 GPixel/s for AMD versus 116.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates favor NVIDIA: 348.5 GTexel/s versus 270.7 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 both favor NVIDIA: 11.15 TFLOPS versus 8.663 TFLOPS, and 22.30 TFLOPS versus 17.33 TFLOPS respectively. TDP differs: 205 W for AMD versus 230 W for NVIDIA. Bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs differ: 5x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C for AMD, versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C for NVIDIA. DirectX support differs: 12 (12_1) for AMD versus 12 Ultimate (12_2) for NVIDIA. Both cards are dual-slot, 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, use 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, and recommend a 550 W PSU.