AMD Radeon PRO W6400 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive verdict: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X wins both head-to-head comparisons, and it does so by a substantial margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX TITAN X scores 41,471 against the AMD Radeon PRO W6400's 35,027, a delta of -15.5% from the AMD card's perspective. That is not a narrow edge; it is a commanding lead of over 6,400 points, reflecting the NVIDIA card's raw compute advantage in a general-purpose workload.

The gap widens further in Geekbench Vulkan, where the GTX TITAN X reaches 49,397 while the Radeon PRO W6400 manages 39,286. This 20.5% delta translates to a 10,111-point difference, making the Vulkan result the single largest victory for NVIDIA in this comparison. The pattern is consistent: regardless of the API, the older, larger NVIDIA card outperforms the newer, smaller AMD part. The data shows no benchmark where the Radeon PRO W6400 takes the lead — winsA is 0, winsB is 2.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the picture. The Radeon PRO W6400's average benchmark score of 37,157 places it just 1.7% above the GTX TITAN X's 36,530 average. Yet in the direct head-to-head tests, the margin flips decisively in NVIDIA's favor. This discrepancy suggests the AMD card's average is buoyed by its Vulkan score, which is relatively stronger than its OpenCL showing, while the GTX TITAN X dominates both. Meanwhile, the GTX TITAN X sits within 0.7% of the NVIDIA T1000 (36,289) and 1.9% above the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860), showing it remains competitive against a range of modern and older parts despite its 2015 origins.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is stark. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X wins in compute-heavy applications that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan, as evidenced by its 15.5% and 20.5% leads respectively. Its higher raw throughput — 6.691 TFLOPS FP32 versus 3.565 TFLOPS for the AMD card — directly explains this dominance. For workloads like rendering, simulation, or GPU-accelerated compute, the GTX TITAN X is the clear choice based on benchmark performance. Additionally, its 12 GB of GDDR5 memory with 336.6 GB/s bandwidth provides a substantial capacity and throughput advantage over the Radeon PRO W6400's 4 GB GDDR6 at 128.0 GB/s, making it better suited for large datasets or high-resolution textures.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 has no benchmark wins to claim, but its architecture and feature set suggest different strengths. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX TITAN X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). This means the AMD card can handle modern graphics features like ray tracing — it has 12 dedicated RT cores — which the NVIDIA card lacks entirely. For professionals working with ray-traced workflows or requiring the latest DirectX feature set, the Radeon PRO W6400 offers capabilities the GTX TITAN X cannot match, even if raw benchmark scores favor NVIDIA.

The AMD card also consumes far less power — 50 W TDP versus 250 W — and requires no external power connectors, making it viable for single-slot, low-power systems. The GTX TITAN X demands a dual-slot footprint, a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connection, and a 600 W suggested PSU, versus 250 W for the AMD part. For space-constrained or power-sensitive deployments, the Radeon PRO W6400 is the practical option, though it sacrifices compute performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 uses the Navi 24 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X, by contrast, uses the GM200 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It contains 8,000 million transistors across a massive 601 mm² die, with a density of just 13.3 million per mm². The process node difference — 6 nm versus 28 nm — is the single most important architectural factor, enabling the AMD card to achieve over 3.8 times the transistor density.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The Radeon PRO W6400 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX TITAN X counters with 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs — exactly four times, four times, and three times the AMD card's counts respectively. This massive core advantage explains the NVIDIA card's higher pixel rate (104.5 GPixel/s versus 74.27 GPixel/s) and texture rate (209.1 GTexel/s versus 111.4 GTexel/s). The AMD card does feature 12 RT cores, which the NVIDIA card lacks, marking a fundamental architectural evolution toward hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Memory architecture also reflects different design philosophies. The Radeon PRO W6400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, while the GTX TITAN X uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The NVIDIA card's wider bus yields 336.6 GB/s bandwidth versus 128.0 GB/s for AMD. Clock speeds tell the opposite story: the AMD card runs at 2039 MHz base and 2321 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA card operates at 1000 MHz base and 1089 MHz boost. The AMD card's higher clocks partially compensate for fewer cores, but not enough to overcome the NVIDIA card's 1.88x FP32 advantage (6.691 TFLOPS versus 3.565 TFLOPS).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W6400 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X |

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

| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 8,000 million |

| Die Size | 107 mm² | 601 mm² |

| Base Clock | 2039 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2321 MHz | 1089 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB GDDR6 | 12 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 64 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 336.6 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 48 | 192 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 12 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 3.565 TFLOPS | 6.691 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 50 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| Release Date | 2022-01-18 | 2015-03-16 |

The table highlights that the AMD card is newer, smaller, and far more efficient, while the NVIDIA card is older, larger, and brute-force powerful. The GTX TITAN X's launch MSRP was 999 USD — the Radeon PRO W6400 has no listed launch MSRP. The NVIDIA card is also physically larger at 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 38 mm width, whereas the AMD card's dimensions are not specified.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 has an average benchmark score of 37,157, which is 1.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X's 36,530.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan workloads?

A: The GTX TITAN X scores 49,397 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 39,286 for the Radeon PRO W6400, a 20.5% difference in NVIDIA's favor.

Q: Does the AMD card support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Radeon PRO W6400 includes 12 dedicated RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The GTX TITAN X has no RT cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The GTX TITAN X offers 12 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, while the Radeon PRO W6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The NVIDIA card's bandwidth is 336.6 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s for AMD.

Q: Which card requires less power?

A: The Radeon PRO W6400 has a 50 W TDP with no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. The GTX TITAN X has a 250 W TDP, requires 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors, and needs a 600 W suggested PSU.

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

A: The GTX TITAN X scores 41,471 in Geekbench OpenCL, 15.5% higher than the Radeon PRO W6400's 35,027.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X is the faster GPU in every benchmark measured. It wins both head-to-head tests, with leads of 15.5% in OpenCL and 20.5% in Vulkan. Its 6.691 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 12 GB memory capacity, and 336.6 GB/s bandwidth make it the superior choice for compute-intensive tasks, large datasets, and any workload that prioritizes raw speed over efficiency. Users who need maximum benchmark performance should pick the GTX TITAN X, provided they can accommodate its 250 W TDP, dual-slot size, and 600 W PSU requirement.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400, despite losing every benchmark, is not without merit. Its 6 nm RDNA 2.0 architecture brings modern features the NVIDIA card cannot offer: DirectX 12 Ultimate support, 12 RT cores for ray tracing, and a 50 W TDP that requires no power connectors. Its higher clock speeds (2321 MHz boost versus 1089 MHz) and PCIe 4.0 interface show technological advancement, even if core counts lag. Professionals needing ray tracing, low power consumption, or a single-slot form factor should choose the AMD card, accepting lower compute performance in exchange for these capabilities.

The average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story: the Radeon PRO W6400's 37,157 average edges out the GTX TITAN X's 36,530 by 1.7%, suggesting the AMD card is more consistent across varied workloads. However, in the specific tests available, NVIDIA dominates. The GTX TITAN X also shows strong standing among its own rivals, sitting within 0.7% of the NVIDIA T1000 and 1.9% above the AMD Radeon Pro Duo. Ultimately, the choice hinges on priorities: benchmark dominance favors NVIDIA; modern features and efficiency favor AMD.