AMD Radeon PRO W6400 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded database results place the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile clearly ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 in the only directly comparable compute benchmark. The NVIDIA part achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,171, while the AMD card reaches 35,027, a delta of 140.3% in favor of the RTX 5050 Mobile. If the workload is raw OpenCL compute throughput, the NVIDIA solution is the decisive pick.

However, the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is not without its own positioning. Its average benchmark score of 37,157 places it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX 5050 Mobile sits in the 83rd percentile with an average score of 43,268. The gap in average score is roughly 16.4% (calculated from 43,268 versus 37,157), which is meaningful but not insurmountable for specific tasks. The AMD part also carries a higher boost clock (2,321 MHz versus 1,500 MHz) and a higher base clock (2,039 MHz versus 1,020 MHz), which can favor latency-sensitive or lightly threaded operations.

For buyers, the decision hinges on the application. The RTX 5050 Mobile is the choice for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads, given its 140.3% lead in that test. The Radeon PRO W6400, being an end-of-life product with a smaller memory footprint (4 GB versus 8 GB), suits scenarios where the software is optimized for RDNA 2.0 or where the single-slot form factor and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs are required. The data does not show a single benchmark where the AMD part wins, so the NVIDIA card is the safer default for general performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile uses the GB207 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 16,900 million transistors on a die size of 149 mm², yielding a transistor density of 113.4 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon PRO W6400, in contrast, is built on the Navi 24 chip with the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using a 6 nm process also at TSMC. It contains 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, with a density of 50.5 million per square millimeter.

Core counts differ substantially. The RTX 5050 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. The Radeon PRO W6400 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores, with no tensor core equivalent listed. This gives the NVIDIA part a 3.3x advantage in shading units and a 1.67x advantage in TMUs, though both have the same ROP count (32).

Memory architecture also diverges. The RTX 5050 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon PRO W6400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 3x the bandwidth and twice the capacity. Clock speeds are inverted: the AMD chip runs at 2,039 MHz base and 2,321 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA chip runs at 1,020 MHz base and 1,500 MHz boost. The AMD part achieves a higher pixel rate (74.27 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s) despite the lower core count, thanks to its higher clock. Texture rates are close: 111.4 GTexel/s for AMD versus 120.0 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Feature support is another differentiator. The RTX 5050 Mobile uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the Radeon PRO W6400 uses PCIe 4.0 x4. The NVIDIA part is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while the AMD part is a single-slot card with no power connectors but a suggested PSU of 250 W. The AMD card offers 2x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the NVIDIA card's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent." Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part's FP16 throughput is 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus 7.680 TFLOPS for NVIDIA (1:1 ratio), while FP32 is 3.565 TFLOPS for AMD and 7.680 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one head-to-head comparison: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile scores 84,171, and the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores 35,027. The winner is the NVIDIA part, with a delta of 140.3%. This is a substantial margin, more than double the AMD score. The result aligns with the raw FP32 compute difference: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 3.565 TFLOPS, a ratio of roughly 2.15x. The OpenCL benchmark appears to scale closely with peak FP32 throughput, which is expected for a compute-bound test.

Looking at broader averages, the RTX 5050 Mobile's average benchmark score is 43,268, while the Radeon PRO W6400's is 37,157. That is a 16.4% gap in favor of NVIDIA. The RTX 5050 Mobile's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (avg score 43,262, delta 0%), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (43,301, delta -0.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223, delta 0.1%). The Radeon PRO W6400's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 (37,507, delta -0.9%), the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (37,628, delta -1.3%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (37,648, delta -1.3%). The data shows that the RTX 5050 Mobile sits at the edge of a performance cluster around 43,000 points, while the Radeon PRO W6400 sits lower, near 37,000 points.

The only other benchmark for the AMD part is Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 39,286. The NVIDIA part has no Vulkan score recorded, so no direct comparison is possible there. The RTX 5050 Mobile also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,365, which the AMD part lacks. Thus, the available data consistently favors NVIDIA in cross-API compute, but the absence of matching Vulkan and DX12 tests for both parts limits the comparison to OpenCL only.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 43,268, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 averages 37,157. The NVIDIA part is higher by roughly 16.4%.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 5050 Mobile in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 5050 Mobile scores 84,171 versus 35,027 for the Radeon PRO W6400. That is a 140.3% higher score for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 have any advantage in clock speed?

A: Yes, the AMD part runs at a 2,039 MHz base clock and 2,321 MHz boost clock, whereas the RTX 5050 Mobile runs at 1,020 MHz base and 1,500 MHz boost. The AMD card also has a higher pixel rate at 74.27 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the memory differences?

A: The RTX 5050 Mobile has 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon PRO W6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is still in production?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is listed as Active, while the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is End-of-life. The NVIDIA part was released on 2025-06-23, and the AMD part on 2022-01-18.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part also has tensor cores (80), which the AMD part lacks.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile wins in compute-heavy workloads, specifically OpenCL. The 140.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the largest recorded margin. The NVIDIA part also wins on memory bandwidth (384.0 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s) and memory capacity (8 GB versus 4 GB), which benefits large datasets and texture-heavy applications. Its higher FP32 throughput (7.680 TFLOPS versus 3.565 TFLOPS) and FP16 throughput (7.680 TFLOPS versus 7.130 TFLOPS) reinforce this compute advantage. The presence of 80 tensor cores also gives it an edge in AI-adjacent tasks, though no specific benchmark covers that.

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 wins on clock speed and pixel fill rate. Its boost clock of 2,321 MHz exceeds the NVIDIA part's 1,500 MHz by 54.7%. The pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s is 54.7% higher than the NVIDIA's 48.00 GPixel/s. This can matter for rasterization at lower resolutions or for driving multiple displays (2x DisplayPort 1.4a). The AMD part also has a smaller die (107 mm² versus 149 mm²) and lower transistor count (5,400 million versus 16,900 million), which may translate to simpler cooling requirements, though both are 50 W TDP. The single-slot form factor is a physical advantage for space-constrained builds.

In terms of percentile ranking, the RTX 5050 Mobile is in the 83rd percentile versus 80th for the Radeon PRO W6400. The NVIDIA part also has a shorter distance to its nearest rival (0% delta to the Quadro M6000 24 GB) than the AMD part has to its nearest rival (-0.9% to the RX Vega 56). This suggests the RTX 5050 Mobile is more tightly clustered at the top of its performance band.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category.

Process and die:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: 5 nm, 16,900 million transistors, 149 mm², density 113.4M / mm²
• Radeon PRO W6400: 6 nm, 5,400 million transistors, 107 mm², density 50.5M / mm²

Clocks:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: base 1,020 MHz, boost 1,500 MHz, memory 1,500 MHz (24 Gbps effective)
• Radeon PRO W6400: base 2,039 MHz, boost 2,321 MHz, memory 2,000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)

Memory:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: 8 GB GDDR7, 128-bit bus, 384.0 GB/s
• Radeon PRO W6400: 4 GB GDDR6, 64-bit bus, 128.0 GB/s

Core configuration:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 20 RT cores, 80 tensor cores
• Radeon PRO W6400: 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 12 RT cores, no tensor cores

Performance rates:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: pixel rate 48.00 GPixel/s, texture rate 120.0 GTexel/s, FP32 7.680 TFLOPS, FP16 7.680 TFLOPS (1:1)
• Radeon PRO W6400: pixel rate 74.27 GPixel/s, texture rate 111.4 GTexel/s, FP32 3.565 TFLOPS, FP16 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1)

Power and physical:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: 50 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, no suggested PSU
• Radeon PRO W6400: 50 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors, suggested PSU 250 W

Interface and outputs:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: PCIe 5.0 x16, display outputs "Portable Device Dependent"
• Radeon PRO W6400: PCIe 4.0 x4, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a

Production status:

• RTX 5050 Mobile: Active, released 2025-06-23, predecessor GeForce 40 Mobile
• Radeon PRO W6400: End-of-life, released 2022-01-18, predecessor Radeon Pro Vega

Both share the same TDP (50 W), ROP count (32), DirectX 12 Ultimate support, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part is the only one with tensor cores, and it has a wider bus interface (PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x4). The AMD part has a higher pixel rate and clock speeds, while the NVIDIA part dominates in memory bandwidth, capacity, shading units, and FP32 compute.