AMD Radeon Pro W5700X vs NVIDIA CMP 50HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear, if narrow, picture of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X versus the NVIDIA CMP 50HX. In the two shared tests, the NVIDIA CMP 50HX wins both, but the margin is starkly different depending on the workload. In Geekbench OpenCL, the CMP 50HX scores 56,135 against the W5700X’s 43,810, a decisive 22% advantage. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial gap that indicates the NVIDIA card’s compute-heavy architecture is far better suited to general-purpose OpenCL tasks.

The Vulkan result tells a different story. Here, the CMP 50HX scores 47,445 against the W5700X’s 45,246, a lead of only 4.6%. This suggests that while NVIDIA retains the edge, the AMD card is far more competitive in graphics-oriented APIs. The data indicates that the W5700X’s RDNA 1.0 architecture punches closer to its weight in Vulkan, narrowing what would otherwise be a rout. For the overall average benchmark score, the CMP 50HX sits at 51,790, while the W5700X averages 54,828. Interestingly, despite losing both head-to-head tests, the AMD card has a higher average score, a discrepancy explained by the fact that the W5700X includes a Geekbench Metal score of 75,427, a test the CMP 50HX does not run. That Metal result heavily inflates the AMD card’s average, highlighting the importance of test selection when comparing these two products.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for where each card sits in the broader market. The W5700X’s average score places it just 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 and RTX 4080 SUPER, and 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB. The CMP 50HX, meanwhile, is 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT and 3.6% ahead of the RX Vega 64. These margins are thin, suggesting that both cards are competitive with their respective peer groups, though neither dominates its tier.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures, which explains their divergent benchmark profiles. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X uses the Navi 10 chip on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This yields a die size of 251 mm² containing 10,300 million transistors, for a density of 41.0 million transistors per square millimeter. In contrast, the NVIDIA CMP 50HX uses the TU102 chip on the Turing architecture, built on a much larger 12 nm process. This results in a 754 mm² die with 18,600 million transistors, but a lower density of just 24.7 million per square millimeter. The process node advantage is clear: AMD packs more transistors per area, while NVIDIA compensates with raw silicon size.

Core configuration also differs sharply. The W5700X has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. The CMP 50HX counters with 3,584 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. NVIDIA’s card also includes 56 ray tracing cores and 448 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the AMD part. This hardware difference explains why the CMP 50HX lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, while the W5700X only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). The Tensor and RT cores give the Turing card a feature set geared toward ray tracing and AI workloads, even if this particular mining-focused SKU lacks display outputs to showcase them.

Memory configurations are equally divergent. The W5700X ships with 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The CMP 50HX has 10 GB of GDDR6 on a wider 320-bit bus, achieving 560.0 GB/s. Despite having 60% more memory capacity, the AMD card has 20% less bandwidth due to the narrower bus. Clock speeds also favor the AMD card: it boosts to 2040 MHz from a 1243 MHz base, while the NVIDIA card boosts to just 1545 MHz from a 1350 MHz base. The higher boost clock helps the W5700X achieve a pixel rate of 130.6 GPixel/s versus 123.6 GPixel/s for the CMP 50HX, though the NVIDIA card wins on texture rate at 296.6 GTexel/s versus 326.4 GTexel/s in the other direction. In raw FP32 throughput, the CMP 50HX edges ahead at 11.07 TFLOPS versus 10.44 TFLOPS, with similar proportional leads in FP16.

Physical and power characteristics also separate these cards. The W5700X is a quad-slot behemoth, 305 mm long, with a 205 W TDP and a suggested 550 W PSU. It uses the Apple MPX bus interface and offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs. The CMP 50HX is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long, 116 mm tall, and 35 mm wide, with a 250 W TDP and a suggested 600 W PSU. It uses 2x 8-pin power connectors, runs on a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, and has no display outputs whatsoever. The NVIDIA card is smaller, more power-hungry, and entirely bereft of video connectivity, reflecting its mining-oriented design.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward verdict: the NVIDIA CMP 50HX is the stronger compute performer, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is the only viable choice for anyone needing display output or Apple ecosystem compatibility. In the two shared benchmarks, the CMP 50HX wins both, with a 22% lead in OpenCL being the headline number. The Vulkan margin is slimmer at 4.6%, but it is still a win. The CMP 50HX also has higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, more shading units, and more memory bandwidth. If raw compute is the sole criterion, the NVIDIA card is the statistical winner.

However, the W5700X is not without merit. It has 16 GB of memory versus 10 GB, a higher boost clock, and a much smaller die on a more advanced process node. Its Geekbench Metal score of 75,427 is a massive outlier that boosts its average benchmark score above the CMP 50HX’s, indicating strong performance in Apple’s Metal API. The card also supports display outputs, making it usable in a workstation context, whereas the CMP 50HX is a headless compute board. The percentile rankings are close: the W5700X sits at the 87th percentile of all GPUs, while the CMP 50HX sits at the 86th. For a user who needs a functional graphics card for a Mac Pro, the W5700X is the only option of the two. For a miner or compute-focused user who never connects a monitor, the CMP 50HX offers superior OpenCL and Vulkan performance in a smaller physical footprint.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 56,135 versus the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X’s 43,810, a 22% advantage.

Q: Is the AMD card competitive in Vulkan?

A: Yes, but it still loses. The CMP 50HX scores 47,445 in Geekbench Vulkan against the W5700X’s 45,246, a 4.6% lead for NVIDIA.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has 16 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX has 10 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Does either card support display outputs?

A: Only the AMD card does. The W5700X offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs. The CMP 50HX has no display outputs.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has an average benchmark score of 54,828, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX averages 51,790. This is due to the W5700X’s strong Geekbench Metal result of 75,427.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has 18,600 million transistors on its TU102 chip, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has 10,300 million on its Navi 10 chip.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X wins in scenarios that require display connectivity and Apple ecosystem integration. Its 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs make it a functional workstation card for Mac Pro systems, as indicated by its "Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series)" generation label. The 16 GB memory capacity is double that of the CMP 50HX, which benefits workloads that need large framebuffers or dataset residency. Its 87th percentile ranking and higher average benchmark score, driven by the 75,427 Metal result, suggest that in Apple-centric environments, this card is the superior choice. The 7 nm process node also means it achieves its 10.44 TFLOPS FP32 performance with a lower 205 W TDP, making it more power-efficient per unit of compute.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX wins in raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 560.0 GB/s bandwidth is 25% higher than the AMD card’s 448.0 GB/s, which is critical for memory-bound workloads. The 11.07 TFLOPS FP32 and 22.15 TFLOPS FP16 performance are both higher than the W5700X’s 10.44 and 20.89 TFLOPS, respectively. The presence of 56 RT cores and 448 tensor cores gives it hardware acceleration for ray tracing and tensor operations that the AMD card lacks entirely. Its dual-slot form factor and 267 mm length make it physically easier to install in standard PC cases, and the PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, while old, is sufficient for mining workloads that do not require display output. The 22% OpenCL victory is the single largest performance delta in the entire comparison, making it the clear choice for OpenCL compute tasks.