AMD Radeon Pro W5700X vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two workstation cards into very different performance classes. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, and it wins them by enormous margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A6000 scores 193937 against the Radeon Pro W5700X's 43810, a 77.4% deficit for the AMD card. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap is nearly as large: 164462 versus 45246, a 72.5% shortfall. The wins are not close, and they are not workload-specific in any way that favors the AMD card. The A6000 dominates compute-oriented APIs, which are the very workloads these workstation cards are typically purchased for.

The Radeon Pro W5700X does hold one meaningful advantage in the broader database context. Its average benchmark score of 54828 places it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A6000's average of 44075 sits in the 84th percentile. That is a curious inversion. The AMD card has a higher average across all recorded benchmarks, yet it loses decisively in the two tests where both cards appear. The explanation lies in the benchmark suites themselves. The A6000's recorded results include multiple Passmark legacy tests, such as DirectX 9, DirectX 10, DirectX 11, and G2D, where scores are low on an absolute scale. Those drag down its average. The W5700X only has three Geekbench results, all of which are solidly mid-range in absolute terms. So the percentile and average figures tell us about benchmark coverage, not about head-to-head capability.

In terms of raw compute throughput, the A6000 is in a different tier. Its FP32 rating of 38.71 TFLOPS is nearly four times the W5700X's 10.44 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 768.0 GB/s is 71% higher than the AMD card's 448.0 GB/s. Its pixel rate of 201.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 604.8 GTexel/s dwarf the AMD card's 130.6 GPixel/s and 326.4 GTexel/s. Every architectural throughput metric points the same direction. The A6000 wins where raw shader work, memory movement, and rasterization volume matter. The W5700X wins only in the aggregate benchmark average, a statistical artifact rather than a competitive advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different foundries, different process nodes, and different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X uses the Navi 10 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. The die measures 251 mm² and contains 10,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 41.0 million per mm². The NVIDIA RTX A6000 uses the GA102 chip built on Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. Its die is far larger at 628 mm² and contains 28,300 million transistors, for a density of 45.1 million per mm². The A6000 is physically larger, denser, and newer in architectural terms, having launched in October 2020 versus December 2019 for the AMD card.

The compute resource gap is stark. The A6000 packs 10752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units. The W5700X has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has more than four times the shader count and more than twice the TMUs and ROPs. The A6000 also carries dedicated hardware that the AMD card lacks entirely: 84 RT cores for ray tracing and 336 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The W5700X has no RT cores and no tensor cores. In a workload ecosystem increasingly reliant on accelerated ray tracing and tensor operations, the AMD card simply has no hardware-level support.

Memory configurations diverge just as dramatically. The W5700X offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, with memory clocks running at 1750 MHz and 14 Gbps effective data rate. The A6000 offers 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384 bit bus, with memory at 2000 MHz and 16 Gbps effective data rate. That yields 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth for NVIDIA versus 448.0 GB/s for AMD. The 48 GB capacity is three times the AMD card's 16 GB, which matters for large data sets, high-resolution textures, and multi-application workflows. The AMD card uses Apple MPX bus interface, while the A6000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs differ as well: the W5700X has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt, while the A6000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Power and physical design also separate them. The A6000 draws a 300 W TDP and requires a 700 W suggested PSU, with an 8-pin EPS connector. The W5700X draws 205 W and suggests a 550 W PSU. The AMD card is a quad-slot design at 305 mm length, while the A6000 is a dual-slot design at 267 mm length and 112 mm height. The NVIDIA card occupies less slot space despite consuming more power, a notable packaging achievement. Both cards are end-of-life production status. The A6000's predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada; the W5700X has no listed predecessor or successor.

API support shows a generational split. The A6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5700X supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference matters for applications that rely on the latest shading and ray tracing features. The A6000's FP16 throughput of 38.71 TFLOPS matches its FP32 rate at a 1:1 ratio, whereas the W5700X achieves 20.89 TFLOPS FP16 via a 2:1 ratio. For mixed-precision workloads, the NVIDIA card is substantially better equipped.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the choice straightforward for most use cases. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 72.5% and 77.4%. It has nearly four times the FP32 throughput, 71% more memory bandwidth, three times the memory capacity, dedicated RT and tensor cores, and a newer DirectX feature level. Any workflow that stresses compute, large memory footprints, or accelerated ray tracing should choose the A6000 without hesitation. The percentile data complicates the picture slightly, since the W5700X ranks higher at 87% versus 84%, but that stems from the A6000's inclusion of low-scoring legacy Passmark tests. The head-to-head results are the authoritative comparison, and they are not close.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X is a viable choice only in specific circumstances. Its launch MSRP is 999 USD, which is substantially lower than the A6000's 4,649 USD launch MSRP. It consumes less power at 205 W versus 300 W, and it uses the Apple MPX interface, which makes it the natural fit for Mac Pro systems. For users locked into Apple's ecosystem, the W5700X offers a capable workstation GPU with 16 GB of GDDR6 and solid Geekbench Metal performance of 75427. Its average benchmark score of 54828 is higher than the A6000's 44075, and its nearest rivals include the GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER at 54209 (1.1% behind) and the Radeon 8060S at 55757 (1.7% ahead). In the aggregate database ranking, the AMD card sits comfortably among high-end consumer and workstation GPUs.

But for pure compute performance in OpenCL and Vulkan, the A6000 is in another league. The data shows no scenario where the W5700X wins a recorded head-to-head test. If the workload is compute-bound, if the data set exceeds 16 GB, or if ray tracing and tensor acceleration are required, the A6000 is the only defensible choice. If the platform is Apple MPX and the budget is constrained, the W5700X remains a reasonable option. The verdict is not ambiguous: the RTX A6000 is the superior GPU by every head-to-head measurement, while the W5700X is a niche product for a specific platform.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 scores 193937 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 77.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X's 43810.

Q: Does the AMD card win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has an average benchmark score of 54828, placing it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 has an average of 44075, placing it in the 84th percentile.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 has 48 GB of GDDR6, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has 16 GB of GDDR6. The A6000 also has a 384 bit bus versus the W5700X's 256 bit bus, giving it 768.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 448.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the RTX A6000 support ray tracing hardware?

A: Yes, it has 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X has no RT cores and no tensor cores.

Q: Which card is better for Mac Pro systems?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X uses the Apple MPX bus interface and has 4x Thunderbolt outputs, making it the compatible option for that platform. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests tell a consistent story of NVIDIA dominance. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A6000 posts 193937 against the W5700X's 43810. The delta is 77.4% in favor of NVIDIA. OpenCL is a compute-oriented API commonly used in scientific, engineering, and rendering workloads. A score gap of this magnitude suggests the A6000 completes compute tasks in roughly a quarter of the time, assuming linear scaling. The W5700X's 10.44 TFLOPS FP32 rating against the A6000's 38.71 TFLOPS explains much of this gap. The A6000 has 10752 shading units working at a boost clock of 1800 MHz, while the W5700X has 2560 shading units at a boost clock of 2040 MHz. The AMD card clocks higher, but it has far fewer units to do the work.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the A6000 scores 164462 against 45246 for the W5700X, a 72.5% delta. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics and compute API, and the NVIDIA card again dominates. The A6000's 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores contribute to its Vulkan compute advantage, as does its 768.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus the AMD card's 448.0 GB/s. The memory subsystem difference is particularly relevant for Vulkan workloads that move large buffers and textures. The A6000 also has a higher texture rate at 604.8 GTexel/s versus 326.4 GTexel/s, and a higher pixel rate at 201.6 GPixel/s versus 130.6 GPixel/s.

The W5700X does have one benchmark result where it looks strong in absolute terms: Geekbench Metal scores 75427. But there is no corresponding Metal result for the A6000 in the recorded data, so no direct comparison is possible. The AMD card's closest rivals in the database are the Radeon 8060S at 55757 (1.7% ahead), the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB at 55698 (1.6% ahead), the GeForce RTX 4080 at 54247 (1.1% behind), and the RTX 4080 SUPER at 54209 (1.1% behind). These are all consumer-class cards, and the W5700X sits right in their midst. The A6000's nearest rivals are the RTX 4090 Mobile at 43667 (0.9% behind), the Quadro M6000 at 43301 (1.8% ahead), the RTX 4070 Ti at 44795 (1.6% behind), and the RTX 5050 Mobile at 43268 (1.9% ahead). The A6000's average is pulled down by its Passmark legacy scores, which range from 87 in DirectX 12 to 245 in DirectX 9, plus a G2D score of 913 and a G3D score of 22577.

The Passmark data offers additional context for the A6000. Its Passmark GPU Compute score is 14110, a strong result. Its DirectX 11 score of 191 and DirectX 12 score of 87 are low in absolute terms, but these are synthetic legacy tests that do not reflect modern workload behavior. The W5700X has no Passmark results in the database, so cross-comparison on that suite is impossible. What the head-to-head tests do show is unambiguous: in the two APIs where both cards were measured under identical conditions, the RTX A6000 wins by margins that exceed 70%. There is no recorded workload in which the W5700X prevails over the A6000. The conclusion from the benchmark data is that these cards are not competitors in performance terms. The A6000 is a high-end workstation accelerator, and the W5700X is a capable but lower-throughput workstation GPU. Buyers who need maximum compute should look at the A6000. Buyers on Apple MPX platforms will find the W5700X adequate, but the data offers no case where it outperforms the NVIDIA card.