AMD Radeon Pro W5700X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 and AMD Radeon Pro W5700X occupy the same 87th percentile of all GPUs, yet their benchmark results reveal a stark performance gulf. The RTX 5080 posts an average benchmark score of 56,083, while the W5700X trails at 54,828, a 2.3% difference according to the RTX 5080's nearest rivals data. However, this aggregate figure masks the true scale of the generational divide between these two cards, which becomes evident only when examining individual workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains just two shared tests, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5080 scores 235,901 against the W5700X's 43,810, yielding a delta of 438.5%. The Vulkan result is even more lopsided: 255,450 versus 45,246, a 464.6% advantage. These are not incremental improvements; they represent a five-fold performance increase in compute-oriented APIs.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the RTX 5080's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8,637 demonstrates strong modern gaming capability. Its Passmark G3D score of 36,565 and GPU compute score of 21,789 further reinforce its position. The W5700X has no corresponding entries in these tests, but its Geekbench Metal score of 75,427 shows it remains competitive in Apple's native graphics API, even if OpenCL and Vulkan performance lag significantly.

The deltaPct figures from the rivals lists contextualize these results. The RTX 5080 is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon 8060S and 0.7% ahead of the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB in average score. Meanwhile, the W5700X sits 1.1% ahead of both the RTX 4080 and RTX 4080 SUPER. This suggests the W5700X, despite its age, holds its own against NVIDIA's previous-generation flagship, but the RTX 5080 operates in a different performance tier altogether.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is enormous. The RTX 5080 uses the GB203 chip built on TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 45,600 million transistors into a 378 mm² die. The W5700X uses the older Navi 10 chip on a 7 nm process, with just 10,300 million transistors across 251 mm². This translates to a transistor density of 120.6 million per mm² for the RTX 5080 versus 41.0 million per mm² for the W5700X. The Blackwell 2.0 architecture brings 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, while RDNA 1.0 provides only 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs.

The RTX 5080 includes 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the W5700X, which lists neither RT nor tensor core counts. Memory configurations diverge as well: both cards offer 16 GB, but the RTX 5080 uses GDDR7 at 30 Gbps effective on a 256-bit bus, achieving 960.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W5700X uses GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective on the same 256-bit bus, yielding just 448.0 GB/s. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the RTX 5080 boosts to 2,617 MHz versus 2,040 MHz for the W5700X, with base clocks of 2,295 MHz and 1,243 MHz respectively.

Compute throughput follows the hardware disparity. The RTX 5080 delivers 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 and 56.28 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The W5700X manages 10.44 TFLOPS FP32 and 20.89 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). Pixel rate is 293.1 GPixel/s versus 130.6 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 879.3 GTexel/s versus 326.4 GTexel/s. The RTX 5080 also supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the W5700X uses Apple MPX, a proprietary interface.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5080 wins every head-to-head benchmark and dominates in compute-heavy workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are roughly five times higher than the W5700X, making it the clear choice for general-purpose GPU compute, rendering, and any task that leverages modern APIs. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8,637 and Passmark G3D score of 36,565 indicate strong DirectX 12 gaming performance, further reinforced by its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support versus the W5700X's DirectX 12 (12_1).

The W5700X's only measurable advantage appears in the Geekbench Metal benchmark, where it scores 75,427. This reflects its design for Apple's ecosystem, with four Thunderbolt display outputs and HDMI 2.0b. For users locked into Metal-based workflows on Mac hardware, the W5700X remains functional, but its OpenCL score of 43,810 and Vulkan score of 45,246 show it cannot compete with the RTX 5080 in cross-platform workloads.

The RTX 5080's 16 GB of GDDR7 memory with 960.0 GB/s bandwidth provides over twice the memory bandwidth of the W5700X's 448.0 GB/s. This matters for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and AI inference tasks. The RT 84 cores and 336 tensor cores give the RTX 5080 dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations, capabilities the W5700X simply lacks.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX 5080 delivers 56.28 TFLOPS FP32, while the W5700X provides 10.44 TFLOPS FP32, a 5.4x difference in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 5080 achieves 960.0 GB/s with GDDR7 memory, while the W5700X reaches 448.0 GB/s with GDDR6, giving the RTX 5080 a 114% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Does the W5700X support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: No. The W5700X lists no RT cores or tensor cores, whereas the RTX 5080 includes 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RTX 5080 averages 56,083, while the W5700X averages 54,828. The RTX 5080's nearest rivals data lists the W5700X as 2.3% behind.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 5080 scores 255,450 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 45,246 for the W5700X, a 464.6% advantage.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The RTX 5080 is listed as Active, while the W5700X is End-of-life.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy: the RTX 5080 outperforms the W5700X in every shared benchmark by margins ranging from 438.5% to 464.6%. The architecture differences are fundamental — Blackwell 2.0 on 5 nm versus RDNA 1.0 on 7 nm, 45,600 million transistors versus 10,300 million, and dedicated RT and tensor hardware that the W5700X lacks entirely.

For users prioritizing raw compute, modern DirectX 12 Ultimate gaming, or ray tracing, the RTX 5080 is the only sensible choice. Its 16 GB GDDR7 memory, 960.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 position it as a high-end card capable of handling demanding workloads. The W5700X, despite its 87th percentile standing and 16 GB GDDR6 memory, cannot approach these performance levels.

However, the W5700X retains relevance in one specific context: Apple MPX bus systems. Its Geekbench Metal score of 75,427 and four Thunderbolt outputs make it a viable option for Mac Pro workstations, where the RTX 5080's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and 1x HDMI 2.1b plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs would not apply. The W5700X also has a lower TDP of 205 W versus 360 W, and its quad-slot design suggests passive cooling for workstation environments.

The verdict depends on ecosystem. In a standard PC with PCIe 5.0, the RTX 5080 wins outright on performance, features, and efficiency per transistor. In a Mac Pro environment requiring Metal and MPX compatibility, the W5700X remains the functional option, albeit at a fraction of the compute throughput. Both cards launched with a 999 USD MSRP, but the RTX 5080 delivers roughly five times the compute performance for the same launch price.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 | AMD Radeon Pro W5700X |

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

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 45,600 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 378 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 120.6M / mm² | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2295 MHz | 1243 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2617 MHz | 2040 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR7 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Speed | 1875 MHz 30 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 960.0 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 10752 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 336 | 160 |

| ROPs | 112 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 84 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 336 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 293.1 GPixel/s | 130.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 879.3 GTexel/s | 326.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 56.28 TFLOPS | 10.44 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1) | 20.89 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 360 W | 205 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Quad-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | null |

| Suggested PSU | 750 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt |

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

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

| Release Date | 2025-01-29 | 2019-12-10 |