AMD Radeon Pro W5700X vs AMD Radeon PRO W7600 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins decisively across every directly comparable benchmark in the database. It takes both recorded head-to-head tests, with the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results going entirely in its favor. The W7600 also holds a higher overall average benchmark score at 87108, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, while the W5700X averages 54828 and sits in the 87th percentile.

The split between the two is therefore not a question of workload preference but one of outright generational advantage. The W7600 is the faster card in every measured compute scenario. However, the W5700X retains one meaningful edge that does not appear in the benchmark averages: memory capacity and bandwidth. With 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, it offers 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, versus the W7600's 8 GB on a 128 bit bus at 288.0 GB/s. For workloads that fit within the W7600's smaller frame buffer, the newer card wins. For datasets that exceed 8 GB, the W5700X is the only option that can hold them.

The W7600 also wins on power efficiency, with a 130 W TDP and a suggested 300 W power supply, versus the W5700X's 205 W TDP and 550 W suggested supply. The W7600 is a single-slot card with a single 6-pin connector, while the W5700X uses a quad-slot cooler and an Apple MPX bus interface. The W7600 is also an active production product, whereas the W5700X is end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 averages 87108 across all recorded benchmarks, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X averages 54828. The W7600 also sits in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the W5700X's 87th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: The W7600 scores 81528 in Geekbench OpenCL, against 43810 for the W5700X. That is a delta of 86.1% in favor of the W7600.

Q: Does the W5700X win any benchmark?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the W5700X wins zero tests. The W7600 wins both the OpenCL and Vulkan comparisons.

Q: What memory advantages does the W5700X offer?

A: The W5700X has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W7600 has 8 GB on a 128 bit bus at 288.0 GB/s. The W5700X also runs its memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the W7600 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The W7600 has a 130 W TDP and requires a 300 W suggested power supply. The W5700X has a 205 W TDP and a 550 W suggested power supply. The W7600 also uses a single-slot cooler and one 6-pin power connector, while the W5700X is a quad-slot design.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: No. The W7600 uses RDNA 3.0 with a Navi 33 chip on a 6 nm process. The W5700X uses RDNA 1.0 with a Navi 10 chip on a 7 nm process. The W7600 is also from the "Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series)" generation, while the W5700X is from "Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series)".

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data is unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 scores 81528, and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X scores 43810. That is an 86.1% advantage for the W7600. In Geekbench Vulkan, the W7600 scores 92688, and the W5700X scores 45246, a 104.9% advantage. The W7600 doubles the Vulkan performance of its predecessor-generation rival.

These results are consistent with the broader average scores. The W7600's average of 87108 places it near the NVIDIA RTX A4500 at 91671 (a 5% deficit) and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile at 91134 (a 4.4% deficit). It is also 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX at 85637 and 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87445. The W5700X's average of 54828, by contrast, sits 1.1% above both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 at 54247 and the RTX 4080 SUPER at 54209, but 1.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB at 55698 and 1.7% below the AMD Radeon 8060S at 55757.

The W5700X does have a Metal benchmark result of 75427 in Geekbench, but the W7600 has no recorded Metal score, so no direct comparison is possible in that API. In every common test, the W7600 leads by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The W7600 uses a 6 nm process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The W5700X uses a 7 nm process with 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, for a density of 41.0M per mm². The W7600's newer node delivers more transistors in a smaller package.

Clock speeds also diverge. The W7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz and a boost clock of 2440 MHz. The W5700X has a base of 1243 MHz and a boost of 2040 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the W7600 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the W5700X runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The memory subsystem is a major differentiator. The W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W5700X has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shader resources also differ: the W7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the W5700X has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The W7600 includes 32 ray tracing cores; the W5700X has none.

Rasterization rates follow. The W7600 achieves 156.2 GPixel/s and 312.3 GTexel/s, while the W5700X achieves 130.6 GPixel/s and 326.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 19.99 TFLOPS for the W7600 and 10.44 TFLOPS for the W5700X. FP16 is 39.98 TFLOPS for the W7600 and 20.89 TFLOPS for the W5700X, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Power and physical specifications differ sharply. The W7600 has a 130 W TDP, a single-slot cooler, one 6-pin connector, and a 300 W suggested power supply. The W5700X has a 205 W TDP, a quad-slot cooler, no listed power connectors, and a 550 W suggested power supply. The W7600 measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length and 115 mm (4.5 inches) in height; the W5700X measures 305 mm (12 inches) in length with no listed height. The W7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the W5700X uses Apple MPX.

Display outputs differ as well. The W7600 offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while the W5700X offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt. The W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5700X supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The W7600 is built on RDNA 3.0, with the Navi 33 chip and the codename "Hotpink Bonefish". It belongs to the "Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series)" generation. The W5700X is built on RDNA 1.0, with the Navi 10 chip and no listed codename, from the "Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series)" generation. This is a full-generation gap, and the benchmark data reflects it.

The W7600's 6 nm process, manufactured by TSMC, enables a higher transistor density and higher clocks. The W5700X's 7 nm process is older and less dense. The W7600 also adds ray tracing cores, which the W5700X lacks entirely. The W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, including the 12_2 feature level, while the W5700X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

The W7600's memory clock is faster in absolute terms, but the W5700X compensates with a wider 256 bit bus and double the capacity. The W5700X is designed for Apple MPX systems, while the W7600 is a standard PCIe 4.0 x8 card. The W7600 is an active product with a 2023 release date, while the W5700X is end-of-life with a 2019 release date.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the faster card in every directly comparable workload. Its OpenCL score of 81528 and Vulkan score of 92688 dwarf the W5700X's 43810 and 45246, respectively. The W7600's average benchmark score of 87108 places it in the 93rd percentile, while the W5700X's 54828 sits in the 87th percentile. The W7600 wins both head-to-head tests, and the W5700X wins none.

The W5700X is the right choice only if the workload demands more than 8 GB of memory. Its 16 GB frame buffer and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are substantial advantages for large datasets. It also supports Metal, with a Geekbench Metal score of 75427, which the W7600 does not list. For users on Apple MPX systems, the W5700X is the only compatible option.

For everyone else, the W7600 is the better pick. It offers nearly double the FP32 throughput (19.99 TFLOPS versus 10.44 TFLOPS), a much higher boost clock (2440 MHz versus 2040 MHz), and ray tracing support. It runs cooler and more efficiently, with a 130 W TDP versus 205 W, and it is still in active production. The launch MSRP of the W7600 was 599 USD, while the W5700X launched at 999 USD. The W7600 also has a higher transistor density (65.2M per mm² versus 41.0M per mm²) and a newer architecture.

The verdict is straightforward: the W7600 wins on compute, efficiency, and future support. The W5700X wins only on memory capacity and Apple ecosystem compatibility. Choose accordingly.