AMD Radeon Pro W5700X vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA RTX A4500 compare to the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X in overall benchmark scores?

A: The RTX A4500 has an average benchmark score of 91,671, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro W5700X averages 54,828, which puts it in the 87th percentile. The gap is substantial, with the A4500 outperforming the W5700X by roughly 67% in aggregate scoring.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance, and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins decisively in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 141,837 versus 43,810 for the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X. That is a 223.8% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RTX A4500 features 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 640.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro W5700X has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher boost clock speeds?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has the higher boost clock at 2040 MHz, compared to 1650 MHz for the NVIDIA RTX A4500. However, the A4500 compensates with far more shaders, TMUs, and ROPs.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. However, the RTX A4500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5700X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What is the physical size difference between the two cards?

A: The RTX A4500 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length. The Radeon Pro W5700X is a quad-slot card measuring 305 mm (12 inches) in length, making it notably longer and thicker.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 and AMD Radeon Pro W5700X represent fundamentally different design philosophies from their respective manufacturers. The A4500 is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. The W5700X uses AMD's RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. The process node difference is significant: 8 nm versus 7 nm, though the A4500 compensates with a much larger die.

The physical scale of the two chips tells a stark story. The GA102 die measures 628 mm² and contains 28,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The Navi 10 die is far smaller at 251 mm², with 10,300 million transistors and a density of 41.0 million per mm². The A4500 packs nearly three times the transistor count onto a die that is roughly two and a half times larger.

Compute resources diverge dramatically. The RTX A4500 ships with 7,168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. It also includes 56 dedicated RT cores and 224 tensor cores, reflecting Ampere's focus on ray tracing and AI acceleration. The W5700X has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no dedicated RT cores or tensor cores at all. This is a first-generation RDNA design that predates AMD's hardware ray tracing push.

Clock behavior differs as well. The W5700X runs at a 1243 MHz base clock and boosts to 2040 MHz, substantially higher than the A4500's 1050 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost. Yet the A4500's massive shading core count more than compensates. FP32 throughput tells the story: the A4500 delivers 23.65 TFLOPS, while the W5700X manages 10.44 TFLOPS. Interestingly, the W5700X offers higher FP16 performance at 20.89 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio, while the A4500 matches FP32 at 23.65 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Memory architecture also differs in ways beyond capacity. The A4500 uses a 320-bit memory bus with 2000 MHz memory clock and 16 Gbps effective speed. The W5700X uses a 256-bit bus with 1750 MHz memory clock and 14 Gbps effective speed. These differences feed into a 640.0 GB/s versus 448.0 GB/s bandwidth gap.

The W5700X is clearly designed for Apple's Mac Pro ecosystem, using the Apple MPX bus interface rather than standard PCIe. The A4500 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs also reflect their intended markets: the A4500 offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the W5700X provides one HDMI 2.0b port and four Thunderbolt connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes two direct head-to-head comparisons, and both favor the NVIDIA RTX A4500 overwhelmingly.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the A4500 scores 141,837 against 43,810 for the W5700X. That represents a 223.8% delta, meaning the NVIDIA card more than triples the AMD card's compute throughput in this workload. OpenCL is a common measure of general-purpose GPU compute, and the gap reflects the A4500's advantages in raw shading power, memory bandwidth, and driver optimization for compute tasks. The W5700X's 10.44 TFLOPS FP32 rating simply cannot keep pace with the A4500's 23.65 TFLOPS.

Geekbench Vulkan tells a similar story. The A4500 reaches 129,980, while the W5700X scores 45,246, a delta of 187.3%. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API heavily used in professional visualization and modern game engines, and the A4500's Ampere architecture with dedicated RT cores gives it a structural advantage in this workload. The W5700X's RDNA 1.0 design, which lacks hardware ray tracing support, falls behind despite its higher boost clock.

The aggregate numbers reinforce these individual results. The A4500's average benchmark score of 91,671 places it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs. The W5700X's average of 54,828 lands in the 87th percentile. In the head-to-head benchmark set, the A4500 wins 2 tests while the W5700X wins none.

When looking at how each card stacks against comparable professional GPUs, the A4500 sits in a tight cluster. The database shows it is 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134 average score), 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 (92,466), 4.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87,445), and 5.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 (87,108). This is a narrow competitive band, meaning the A4500 is well-positioned among workstation GPUs of its generation.

The W5700X's nearest rivals paint a different picture. It is 1.1% ahead of both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 and RTX 4080 SUPER, whose average scores are 54,247 and 54,209 respectively. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by 1.6% (55,698) and the AMD Radeon 8060S by 1.7% (55,757). These rivals are consumer or integrated-class products, indicating the W5700X's performance tier is closer to high-end consumer hardware than to flagship workstation silicon.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key specification differences between the two cards:

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A4500 | AMD Radeon Pro W5700X |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 1.0 |

| Chip | GA102 | Navi 10 |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 7 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1050 MHz | 1243 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 2040 MHz |

| Memory Size | 20 GB GDDR6 | 16 GB GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 320 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 640.0 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 7,168 | 2,560 |

| TMUs | 224 | 160 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 56 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 224 | None |

| FP32 | 23.65 TFLOPS | 10.44 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 23.65 TFLOPS (1:1) | 20.89 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 158.4 GPixel/s | 130.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 369.6 GTexel/s | 326.4 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 200 W | 205 W |

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

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

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

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 305 mm (12 inches) |

Both cards use GDDR6 memory and share the same 550 W suggested PSU requirement. Both are end-of-life products. The A4500's launch MSRP was not recorded in the database; the W5700X had a launch MSRP of 999 USD.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 is the clear winner in raw compute and graphics performance. Its 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 640.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 20 GB frame buffer make it suitable for large-scale simulation, scientific computing, heavy 3D rendering, and AI-adjacent workloads. The 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores add hardware acceleration for ray tracing and tensor operations that the W5700X simply cannot offer. For professionals running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the data shows a 223.8% and 187.3% advantage respectively. The A4500 also benefits from a smaller physical footprint at dual-slot width versus the W5700X's quad-slot design, and it uses a standard PCIe 4.0 x16 interface rather than the Apple MPX bus.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has a narrower set of advantages. Its higher boost clock of 2040 MHz and lower transistor density (41.0M per mm² versus 45.1M per mm²) reflect a more efficient process node, though this does not translate into competitive compute performance. Its FP16 throughput of 20.89 TFLOPS is closer to the A4500's 23.65 TFLOPS than its FP32 figure is, suggesting that half-precision workloads narrow the gap somewhat. The W5700X's four Thunderbolt display outputs and HDMI 2.0b port make it a natural fit for Apple Mac Pro environments, and its 999 USD launch MSRP positions it as a more accessible entry point for that ecosystem. The card's 87th percentile ranking is respectable, and its closest rivals include the GeForce RTX 4080 and RTX 4080 SUPER, indicating it can hold its own against high-end consumer GPUs.

However, for professional workstation use where compute density and memory capacity matter most, the A4500 is the superior choice in every measured benchmark category. The W5700X's advantages are limited to form factor compatibility with Apple's MPX standard and a lower launch price. In terms of pure performance, the database records no test where the W5700X beats the A4500.