GPU Comparison

# AMD Radeon Pro W5700X vs NVIDIA RTX A2000

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X and NVIDIA RTX A2000 represent two very different approaches to workstation graphics, separated by nearly two years of silicon evolution. The data shows a clear split: the Radeon Pro W5700X carries more memory and raw throughput on paper, while the RTX A2000 delivers dramatically higher scores in the available cross-benchmark comparisons. With the RTX A2000 winning both head-to-head tests by margins above 34%, and the W5700X holding advantages in memory capacity and pixel throughput, the choice depends heavily on workload priorities.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A2000 dominates the only two benchmarks where both cards appear in the head-to-head dataset. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card scores 67,695 against the AMD card’s 43,810, a 35.3% advantage. The Geekbench Vulkan result is nearly identical in proportional terms: 69,089 versus 45,246, a 34.5% lead. These are not marginal wins; they represent a substantial performance tier difference in compute-oriented API workloads. The RTX A2000 also brings dedicated RT cores (26) and Tensor cores (104), which the W5700X lacks entirely, making it the only option here for hardware-accelerated ray tracing or AI inference tasks.

The Radeon Pro W5700X wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, it delivers 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, 55.6% more than the RTX A2000’s 288.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus. For large datasets that exceed 6 GB, the AMD card is the only viable choice. It also has a higher pixel rate: 130.6 GPixel/s versus 57.60 GPixel/s, which benefits fill-rate-bound rendering scenarios. The W5700X’s FP32 throughput of 10.44 TFLOPS exceeds the RTX A2000’s 7.987 TFLOPS by roughly 31%, and its FP16 rate of 20.89 TFLOPS (2:1) is more than double the NVIDIA card’s 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1). In raw shading and texturing, the AMD card is the arithmetic winner.

The percentile rankings reflect the broader context. The W5700X sits at the 87th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 54,828, while the RTX A2000 lands at the 85th percentile with 46,043. The AMD card’s nearest rivals include the GeForce RTX 4080 (average 54,247, just 1.1% behind) and the RTX 4080 SUPER (54,209, also 1.1% behind), placing it in high-end gaming GPU territory. The RTX A2000’s rivals are the RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45,972, 0.2% ahead) and Intel Arc A730M (45,592, 1% behind), a more modest performance neighborhood.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different fabrication generations and design philosophies. The W5700X uses AMD’s RDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, packing 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die. The RTX A2000 employs NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung process, with 12,000 million transistors across a larger 276 mm² die. Despite having fewer transistors, the AMD chip achieves a higher transistor density of 41.0M per mm² versus 43.5M for the NVIDIA chip, the smaller process node allows tighter packing, though the NVIDIA part still has more raw transistor count.

Core configuration differs substantially. The W5700X has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. NVIDIA’s card has 30% more shaders but 35% fewer TMUs and 25% fewer ROPs. This explains the divergent strengths: the AMD card’s higher texture and pixel rates (326.4 GTexel/s and 130.6 GPixel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s and 57.60 GPixel/s) come from having more texture units and ROPs, while the NVIDIA card’s shader-heavy design favors compute workloads.

Clock speeds also tell a story. The W5700X runs at a base of 1243 MHz and boosts to 2040 MHz, while the RTX A2000 operates at just 562 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. The AMD card’s higher clocks contribute to its FP32 advantage, but the NVIDIA card’s efficiency is evident from its 70 W TDP versus the AMD card’s 205 W, a three-fold difference in power draw. The RTX A2000 also features 26 RT cores and 104 Tensor cores, which are absent from the W5700X, marking the architectural generation gap. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD card is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the larger of the two NVIDIA wins. The RTX A2000 scores 67,695 versus the W5700X’s 43,810, a delta of -35.3% from the AMD card’s perspective. This is a decisive margin that places the NVIDIA card roughly 54% ahead of the AMD card in raw OpenCL compute. The RTX A2000’s higher shader count and Tensor cores likely drive this result, as OpenCL workloads often scale with parallel compute units.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a similar pattern. The RTX A2000 posts 69,089, while the W5700X manages 45,246, a -34.5% delta. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that rewards driver efficiency and architectural throughput, and the NVIDIA card’s Ampere architecture appears better optimized for this workload. Notably, the RTX A2000’s Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score (69,089 versus 67,695), while the W5700X’s Vulkan score (45,246) also slightly exceeds its OpenCL score (43,810). Both cards show consistent API behavior, but the NVIDIA card’s absolute numbers are far superior.

The W5700X’s average benchmark score of 54,828 across all tests is higher than the RTX A2000’s 46,043, but this aggregate includes the Geekbench Metal test (75,427) where the RTX A2000 has no comparable result in the dataset. When isolating the common benchmarks, the NVIDIA card wins both. The RTX A2000’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,345 has no counterpart in the W5700X’s data, so it cannot be compared directly. The overall picture is one of specialization: the W5700X holds theoretical throughput advantages, but the RTX A2000 delivers better real-world compute performance in the tests that matter.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every major specification. The W5700X uses a 7 nm TSMC process with a 251 mm² die and 10,300 million transistors; the RTX A2000 uses an 8 nm Samsung process with a 276 mm² die and 12,000 million transistors. Clock speeds differ by roughly 2:1 in favor of the AMD card: 1243 MHz base and 2040 MHz boost versus 562 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. Memory configurations are starkly different: 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 6 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the AMD card and 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card.

Compute resources favor the NVIDIA card in shader count (3,328 versus 2,560) but the AMD card in TMUs (160 versus 104) and ROPs (64 versus 48). The RTX A2000 adds 26 RT cores and 104 Tensor cores; the W5700X has none. Pixel rate is 130.6 GPixel/s versus 57.60 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 326.4 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 10.44 TFLOPS versus 7.987 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 20.89 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1). Power consumption differs enormously: 205 W versus 70 W TDP, with suggested PSU ratings of 550 W versus 250 W.

Physical and interface differences are equally pronounced. The W5700X is a quad-slot card measuring 305 mm (12 inches) in length, using an Apple MPX bus interface. The RTX A2000 is a dual-slot card at 167 mm (6.6 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) tall, using PCIe 4.0 x16, and requires no power connectors. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt for the AMD card, versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for the NVIDIA card. The W5700X was released on December 10, 2019, while the RTX A2000 arrived on August 9, 2021. The NVIDIA card’s predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada; the AMD card has no listed predecessor or successor. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance in shared benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests. It scores 67,695 in OpenCL versus 43,810 for the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (35.3% higher), and 69,089 in Vulkan versus 45,246 (34.5% higher).

Q: How much more memory does the AMD card offer?

A: The W5700X has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, more than double the RTX A2000’s 6 GB. The AMD card also has a wider 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, compared to 192-bit and 288.0 GB/s for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the RTX A2000 support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The RTX A2000 has 26 RT cores and 104 Tensor cores built into its Ampere architecture. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has no RT or Tensor cores, so it cannot perform hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The RTX A2000 has a 70 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested PSU, while the W5700X has a 205 W TDP and a 550 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA card also needs no external power connectors and occupies a dual-slot form factor, versus quad-slot for the AMD card.

Q: Which card has higher theoretical pixel and texture throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X leads with 130.6 GPixel/s pixel rate and 326.4 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to 57.60 GPixel/s and 124.8 GTexel/s for the RTX A2000. This comes from its higher ROP and TMU counts.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare overall?

A: The W5700X has an average benchmark score of 54,828, placing it at the 87th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX A2000 averages 46,043, at the 85th percentile. However, the W5700X’s advantage comes from a Geekbench Metal score (75,427) that has no counterpart for the NVIDIA card.