AMD Radeon PRO W6400 vs AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE occupy completely different positions in the GPU landscape, and the benchmark data reflects that stark divide. The RX 7900 GRE wins both recorded head-to-head tests outright, with no victories for the PRO W6400 in any shared benchmark. However, the PRO W6400 has its own distinct strengths that are not captured by raw compute scores.

The PRO W6400 is a professional workstation card built for efficiency and specific enterprise workloads. Its 50 W TDP and single-slot design make it suitable for compact or multi-GPU configurations where power density and physical space are at a premium. The card draws power directly from the PCIe slot with no auxiliary power connectors, and it requires only a 250 W suggested PSU. This makes it a fit for systems where the RX 7900 GRE, with its 260 W TDP and dual 8-pin connectors, simply cannot operate. The PRO W6400 also uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, which, while narrower than the x16 connection on the RX 7900 GRE, is sufficient for its intended professional tasks.

The RX 7900 GRE, by contrast, is a high-performance consumer and prosumer card. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus delivers 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a massive advantage for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and compute-heavy workloads. The card's 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 160 ROPs dwarf the PRO W6400's 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. In OpenCL, the RX 7900 GRE scores 175758 against the PRO W6400's 35027, a 80.1% difference. In Vulkan, the gap is 60.7%, with scores of 99850 and 39286 respectively.

So the use-case split is clear: the PRO W6400 wins on power efficiency, physical footprint, and deployment flexibility in professional environments, while the RX 7900 GRE wins decisively on raw performance, memory capacity, and bandwidth. For workloads like large-scale rendering, AI inference, or high-resolution gaming, the RX 7900 GRE is the obvious choice. For low-power professional visualization, multi-card array setups, or systems with limited PSU capacity, the PRO W6400 has a clear role.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are separated by a full architecture generation and a massive die design difference. The PRO W6400 is built on RDNA 2.0, using the Navi 24 chip fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. The die measures 107 mm² and contains 5,400 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 50.5M per mm². The RX 7900 GRE, in contrast, uses RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 31 chip (codenamed Plum Bonito) on TSMC's 5 nm process. Its die is 529 mm², nearly five times larger, and packs 57,700 million transistors at a density of 109.1M per mm².

The clock behavior also differs substantially. The PRO W6400 has a base clock of 2039 MHz and a boost clock of 2321 MHz, with no listed game clock. The RX 7900 GRE has a lower base clock of 1287 MHz but a higher game clock of 1880 MHz and a boost clock of 2245 MHz. The RX 7900 GRE's memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the PRO W6400's memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Architecturally, the RX 7900 GRE brings 80 ray tracing cores, versus 12 on the PRO W6400, and both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has tensor cores listed. The RX 7900 GRE is part of the Radeon RX 7000 series, while the PRO W6400 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi II Series). The RX 7900 GRE's predecessor is listed as Navi II and its successor as Navi IV, indicating a more recent position in AMD's roadmap. The PRO W6400's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega, with no successor listed.

The RX 7900 GRE features a dual-slot design, measures 276 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 51 mm in width, and offers a richer display output suite: 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C. The PRO W6400 is single-slot with only 2x DisplayPort 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE scores 175758 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores 35027. The RX 7900 GRE leads by 80.1%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 7900 GRE scores 99850 in Geekbench Vulkan, versus 39286 for the PRO W6400, a 60.7% advantage for the RX 7900 GRE.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The PRO W6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the RX 7900 GRE has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The RX 7900 GRE's bandwidth is 576.0 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s for the PRO W6400.

Q: Which card has a lower power requirement?

A: The PRO W6400 has a 50 W TDP and requires no auxiliary power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RX 7900 GRE has a 260 W TDP, needs two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 600 W PSU.

Q: Are there differences in ray tracing capabilities?

A: Yes. The RX 7900 GRE has 80 ray tracing cores, while the PRO W6400 has 12. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The PRO W6400 is listed as end-of-life and was released on 2022-01-18. The RX 7900 GRE is listed as active and was released on 2023-07-26.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W6400 | AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Chip | Navi 24 | Navi 31 (Plum Bonito) |

| Process node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Die size | 107 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 57,700 million |

| Transistor density | 50.5M / mm² | 109.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2039 MHz | 1287 MHz |

| Game clock | Not listed | 1880 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2321 MHz | 2245 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 4 GB GDDR6 | 16 GB GDDR6 |

| Memory bus | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 48 | 320 |

| ROPs | 32 | 160 |

| Ray tracing cores | 12 | 80 |

| Pixel rate | 74.27 GPixel/s | 359.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 111.4 GTexel/s | 718.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.565 TFLOPS | 45.98 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) | 91.96 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 260 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 600 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 276 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2022-01-18 | 2023-07-26 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 549 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data contains only two shared benchmark tests, and the RX 7900 GRE wins both by substantial margins.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7900 GRE scores 175758 against the PRO W6400's 35027. This is a 80.1% difference, meaning the RX 7900 GRE delivers roughly five times the raw compute throughput in this workload. OpenCL is a common proxy for general-purpose GPU compute, and the gap reflects the fundamental differences in shading units (5120 vs 768) and FP32 throughput (45.98 TFLOPS vs 3.565 TFLOPS). For any compute-heavy application, the RX 7900 GRE is in a different performance class entirely.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 7900 GRE scores 99850, while the PRO W6400 scores 39286. The 60.7% delta is smaller than the OpenCL gap but still decisive. Vulkan performance correlates strongly with graphics and game workloads, and the RX 7900 GRE's higher texture rate (718.4 GTexel/s vs 111.4 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (359.2 GPixel/s vs 74.27 GPixel/s) explain the advantage. The PRO W6400's 12 ray tracing cores are vastly outnumbered by the RX 7900 GRE's 80, further widening the gap in modern rendering paths.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a similar story but with a nuance. The PRO W6400 averages 37157 across its two recorded tests, and it sits at the 80th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37507, a 0.9% difference), NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37628, 1.3%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (37648, 1.3%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (36530, 1.7% in the PRO W6400's favor). This places the small, low-power PRO W6400 in surprisingly competitive company for its class.

The RX 7900 GRE averages 32456 across its ten recorded tests, which lands it at the 77th percentile. Its nearest rivals are all older or lower-tier cards: AMD FirePro S10000 (32388, 0.2% difference), AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (32540, 0.3%), AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (32601, 0.4%), and AMD Radeon Pro 570X (32176, 0.9%). These narrow margins suggest that the RX 7900 GRE's average is dragged down by its Passmark scores, which are heavily weighted toward specific DirectX tests that may not reflect its full capability.

Specifically, the RX 7900 GRE records Passmark scores of 139 in DirectX 10, 300 in DirectX 11, 107 in DirectX 12, and 310 in DirectX 9. Its Passmark G3D score is 27089, and its GPU compute score is 15016. The G2D score is 1180. These numbers are not directly comparable to the PRO W6400 since that card lacks Passmark entries, but they do illustrate that the RX 7900 GRE's average is influenced by a wide range of test conditions.

The PRO W6400's percentile ranking (80th) is actually three points higher than the RX 7900 GRE's (77th), despite the RX 7900 GRE winning both head-to-head tests by enormous margins. This counterintuitive result stems from the different benchmark suites each card was subjected to and the fact that the PRO W6400's two scores, both in Geekbench tests, are relatively strong for its power class. The RX 7900 GRE's broader test coverage includes Passmark legacy DirectX tests where it scores low, pulling its average down.

In practical terms, the head-to-head results are unambiguous: the RX 7900 GRE is the vastly more powerful card for compute and graphics. The PRO W6400's value lies not in raw performance but in its extreme efficiency, compact single-slot form factor, and professional feature set. The data shows two cards engineered for different ends of the market, and the benchmark results simply confirm that performance scales with die size, memory bandwidth, and power budget.