AMD Radeon Pro W5700 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 and NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell represent two distinct eras of workstation graphics, with the data showing a decisive generational shift. The RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell wins all nine head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with margins ranging from a modest 6.6% to a commanding 40.2%. Despite the W5700 holding a slightly higher average benchmark score (25,726 vs. 25,269) and percentile ranking (71st vs. 70th), the NVIDIA card's architectural advantages and superior raw compute metrics make it the stronger performer in direct comparisons.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell delivers 17.03 TFLOPS, which is nearly double the AMD Radeon Pro W5700's 8.663 TFLOPS. This represents a 96.5% advantage in raw single-precision compute.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The W5700 features 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX PRO 2000 offers 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has twice the capacity but 35.7% less bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell, built on a 5 nm process, packs 121.0M transistors per mm². The W5700, using a 7 nm process, has 41.0M transistors per mm² — a 195% higher density for the NVIDIA chip.

Q: Which GPU supports hardware ray tracing?

A: Only the RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell includes dedicated RT cores, featuring 34 of them along with 136 tensor cores. The W5700 has no RT cores or tensor cores listed, making the NVIDIA card the clear choice for ray-traced workloads.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has a 70 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, with a suggested 250 W PSU. The W5700 draws 205 W, needs both a 6-pin and 8-pin connector, and recommends a 550 W PSU.

Q: Which GPU has the larger die despite being on a newer process?

A: The W5700's Navi 10 die measures 251 mm² with 10,300 million transistors. The RTX PRO 2000's GB206 die is smaller at 181 mm² but contains 21,900 million transistors — more than double the transistor count in a physically smaller package.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture on TSMC's 7 nm process, featuring a Navi 10 chip with 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die. In contrast, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture using TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 21,900 million transistors into a smaller 181 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 121.0M per mm² for NVIDIA versus just 41.0M per mm² for AMD — a 195% density advantage.

The compute core configurations differ dramatically. The W5700 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The RTX PRO 2000 counters with 4,352 shading units, 136 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. While the NVIDIA card has 88.9% more shading units, it has 5.6% fewer TMUs and 25% fewer ROPs. Critically, the RTX PRO 2000 includes 34 RT cores and 136 tensor cores — dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI acceleration that the W5700 completely lacks.

Clock speeds show an interesting trade-off. The W5700 has a higher base clock at 1400 MHz versus 982 MHz, but the RTX PRO 2000 boosts higher at 1957 MHz versus 1880 MHz. Memory technology also diverges: the W5700 uses GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective, while the RTX PRO 2000 uses GDDR7 at 18 Gbps effective. The AMD card's wider 256-bit bus gives it 55.6% more bandwidth (448.0 vs. 288.0 GB/s), but the NVIDIA card's 16 GB capacity is double the W5700's 8 GB.

Feature support shows NVIDIA's advantage. The RTX PRO 2000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) while the W5700 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 5.0 x8 for NVIDIA. The RTX PRO 2000's TDP of 70 W is dramatically lower than the W5700's 205 W, requiring no external power connectors compared to the AMD card's 6-pin plus 8-pin setup.

The Verdict

The data strongly favors the NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell for most modern workstation workloads. Its 9-0 sweep in head-to-head benchmarks, combined with double the memory capacity (16 GB vs. 8 GB), dedicated RT and tensor cores, and significantly lower power draw (70 W vs. 205 W) make it the superior choice for compute-heavy, ray-traced, and AI-accelerated tasks. The NVIDIA card's FP32 throughput of 17.03 TFLOPS is 96.5% higher than the W5700's 8.663 TFLOPS, and its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate ensures broader compatibility with the latest graphics APIs.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 retains advantages in specific areas. Its 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is 55.6% higher than the RTX PRO 2000's 288.0 GB/s, which can benefit bandwidth-sensitive workloads like certain rendering or texture-heavy applications. The W5700 also has a higher average benchmark score (25,726 vs. 25,269) and better percentile ranking (71st vs. 70th), though these differences are marginal (1.8% and 1 percentage point respectively).

The W5700 is an end-of-life product released in 2019, while the RTX PRO 2000 is an active product from 2025. For users needing a current, actively supported GPU with modern features, the RTX PRO 2000 is the clear choice. The W5700 might still appeal to those with legacy software optimized for AMD's architecture or requiring the wider memory bus, but its lower compute throughput and lack of RT/tensor cores make it less future-proof.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W5700 | NVIDIA RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 10,300 million | 21,900 million |

| Die Size | 251 mm² | 181 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1400 MHz | 982 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1880 MHz | 1957 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 4352 |

| TMUs | 144 | 136 |

| ROPs | 64 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 34 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 136 |

| FP32 Compute | 8.663 TFLOPS | 17.03 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 205 W | 70 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 5x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1b |

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

| Dimensions | 267 mm length, 111 mm height | 167 mm length, 69 mm height, 20 mm width |

| Release Date | 2019-11-18 | 2025-08-10 |

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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell dominates every benchmark comparison, though the margins vary significantly across workload types. The largest victory comes in Passmark DirectX 11, where NVIDIA scores 174 against AMD's 104 — a 40.2% advantage. This suggests strong performance in legacy DirectX 11 applications, which remain common in professional environments.

Compute workloads show substantial NVIDIA superiority. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX PRO 2000 scores 106,087 versus 74,613 for the W5700, a 29.7% difference. The Vulkan gap is even wider: 113,865 versus 70,706, representing a 37.9% margin. These results align with the FP32 compute disparity (17.03 vs. 8.663 TFLOPS), indicating NVIDIA's architectural efficiency translates directly to real-world compute performance.

DirectX 12 performance shows a 32.5% NVIDIA advantage (80 vs. 54), while DirectX 10 demonstrates a 27.9% gap (122 vs. 88). The Passmark G3D score tells a similar story: 20,049 for NVIDIA versus 14,520 for AMD, a 27.6% difference. GPU compute in Passmark shows the narrowest margin among compute tests, with NVIDIA winning 8,396 to 6,495 (22.6% ahead).

The closest contest is Passmark DirectX 9, where NVIDIA scores 241 against AMD's 225 — just a 6.6% difference. This indicates that for very old DirectX 9 workloads, the two GPUs perform nearly identically. Passmark G2D performance shows a 31% NVIDIA advantage (1,303 vs. 899), suggesting better 2D and desktop composition performance.

Interestingly, the RTX PRO 2000's average benchmark score (25,269) is actually 1.8% lower than the W5700's (25,726), despite winning every head-to-head test. This discrepancy arises because the average includes different benchmark suites — the W5700's average includes Geekbench Metal (89,557), while the RTX PRO 2000 includes 3DMark Steel Nomad (2,374.5), which the AMD card lacks. The RTX PRO 2000's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 itself, with a delta of -1.8%, while the W5700's closest competitor is the GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile at -0.1%.