AMD Radeon Pro W6800X vs NVIDIA GB10 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro W6800X and NVIDIA GB10 occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape, yet both deliver top-tier scores in their respective benchmark pools. The W6800X is an end-of-life Mac workstation card built on RDNA 2.0, while the GB10 is an active server-class Blackwell part with a much newer architecture. The data shows a clear overall winner in raw average score, but the GB10 counters with higher peak compute rates and a far larger memory pool. This analysis walks through the head-to-head results, architectural splits, and which card suits which workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In that run, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X scores 124,498, while the NVIDIA GB10 scores 120,137. That gives the W6800X a 3.6% lead. It is a narrow margin, but it is consistent with the average benchmark scores of both cards. The W6800X averages 160,671 across all its recorded tests, while the GB10 averages 117,393. That is a 36.9% gap in favor of the AMD card, driven largely by the W6800X’s strong Geekbench Metal result of 196,844 — a test the GB10 does not participate in, as it has no Metal benchmark listed.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the W6800X sits at the 97th percentile of all GPUs, and its average score of 160,671 is only 1.1% behind the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (162,504) and 2.6% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 (164,894). The GB10, by contrast, is at the 95th percentile, with an average of 117,393 that is 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117,088) and 2.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395). So while the W6800X outperforms the GB10 in the shared OpenCL test, the GB10’s benchmark profile places it closer to mid-range workstation cards, not the high-end server parts the W6800X rivals.

The GB10 does have a Geekbench Vulkan score of 114,648, which is not directly compared to the W6800X, but it is lower than the W6800X’s OpenCL score and far below its Metal score. The W6800X wins the only direct head-to-head, and it wins the average-score comparison by a substantial margin. The GB10’s higher boost clock and FP32 throughput do not translate into a benchmark victory in the available data.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from completely different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X uses the Navi 21 chip on a 7 nm TSMC process, with 26,800 million transistors packed into a 520 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 51.5 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GB10 uses the GB20B chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, with a 382 mm² die size — the transistor count is listed as unknown. The GB10’s process node is smaller, but the W6800X has a larger die and a known transistor count that is significantly higher than anything disclosed for the GB10.

Memory is a major split. The W6800X has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GB10 has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on the same 256-bit bus, but bandwidth drops to 273.2 GB/s. That is a 46.6% reduction in bandwidth for the GB10, despite having four times the memory capacity. The GB10 also uses slower memory clocks: 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, versus the W6800X’s 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. For memory-bound workloads, the W6800X has a clear advantage in throughput, while the GB10 wins on capacity for large datasets.

Compute resources differ sharply. The W6800X has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 60 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed. The GB10 has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 48 ray tracing cores, and 384 tensor cores. The GB10 has 60% more shading units and 60% more TMUs, but half the ROPs. That explains the GB10’s higher texture rate of 928.5 GTexel/s versus the W6800X’s 500.9 GTexel/s, while the W6800X’s pixel rate of 200.4 GPixel/s beats the GB10’s 116.1 GPixel/s. FP32 compute favors the GB10 at 29.71 TFLOPS versus 16.03 TFLOPS for the W6800X, a gap of 85.3%. FP16 is a different story: the W6800X hits 32.06 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the GB10 stays at 29.71 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. So the W6800X has higher FP16 throughput, but the GB10 has higher FP32 throughput.

The GB10 also includes 384 tensor cores, which the W6800X lacks entirely. That is a feature difference that matters for AI inference and training workloads, though the benchmark data does not directly test tensor performance. The GB10 has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support listed (all N/A), while the W6800X supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The W6800X is a fully featured graphics card with display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 4x Thunderbolt), while the GB10 has only 1x HDMI and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. Power and form factor also differ: the W6800X draws 200 W with a quad-slot design and Apple MPX power connector, while the GB10 draws 140 W, is an IGP with no power connectors, and fits a 150 mm by 51 mm by 150 mm footprint.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is the stronger performer in raw benchmark scores. It wins the only shared test (Geekbench OpenCL) by 3.6%, and its average benchmark score of 160,671 is 36.9% higher than the GB10’s 117,393. The W6800X also sits at the 97th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 95th for the GB10. For anyone prioritizing compute throughput in OpenCL or Metal, the W6800X is the clear choice.

The NVIDIA GB10, however, offers features the W6800X cannot match. It has 128 GB of memory versus 32 GB, which is a 4x capacity advantage. It also has 384 tensor cores, enabling AI-specific workloads that the W6800X has no hardware for. The GB10’s FP32 throughput of 29.71 TFLOPS is 85.3% higher than the W6800X’s 16.03 TFLOPS, and its texture rate of 928.5 GTexel/s nearly doubles the W6800X’s 500.9 GTexel/s. The GB10 is also newer (released 2025-10-14 versus 2021-08-02) and still in active production, while the W6800X is end-of-life.

The verdict depends on workload. For graphics-heavy tasks with high pixel throughput and memory bandwidth, the W6800X wins. For AI inference, large memory footprints, and raw FP32 compute, the GB10 wins. The benchmark data favors the W6800X overall, but the GB10’s architectural advantages are substantial in specific domains.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X averages 160,671, while the NVIDIA GB10 averages 117,393. That is a 36.9% difference in favor of the W6800X.

Q: What is the result of the only direct head-to-head benchmark?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the W6800X scores 124,498 and the GB10 scores 120,137, giving the W6800X a 3.6% win.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The W6800X has 32 GB of GDDR6, while the GB10 has 128 GB of LPDDR5X. The GB10 has four times the capacity.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The GB10 has 29.71 TFLOPS of FP32, versus 16.03 TFLOPS for the W6800X. That is an 85.3% advantage for the GB10.

Q: Does either card support tensor cores?

A: Yes, the GB10 has 384 tensor cores. The W6800X has no tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The W6800X is built on a 7 nm TSMC process, while the GB10 uses a 5 nm TSMC process.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X wins in memory bandwidth, with 512.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s for the GB10. That is a 46.6% advantage, which matters for high-resolution textures and large frame buffers. The W6800X also wins in pixel rate (200.4 GPixel/s versus 116.1 GPixel/s), FP16 compute (32.06 TFLOPS versus 29.71 TFLOPS), and ROP count (96 versus 48). It has DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, while the GB10 has no API support listed. The W6800X also has more display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 4x Thunderbolt) versus the GB10’s single HDMI.

The NVIDIA GB10 wins in shading units (6,144 versus 3,840), TMUs (384 versus 240), and ray tracing cores (48 versus 60 — wait, the W6800X has 60 RT cores, so the GB10 does not win there). Correcting: the GB10 wins in FP32 compute (29.71 TFLOPS versus 16.03 TFLOPS), texture rate (928.5 GTexel/s versus 500.9 GTexel/s), and memory capacity (128 GB versus 32 GB). It also has 384 tensor cores, which the W6800X lacks, and a lower TDP of 140 W versus 200 W. The GB10 is also newer and active, while the W6800X is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W6800X | NVIDIA GB10 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 26,800 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 51.5M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 1800 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2087 MHz | 2418 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz / 16 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz / 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 32 GB GDDR6 | 128 GB LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3840 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 240 | 384 |

| ROPs | 96 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 384 |

| Pixel Rate | 200.4 GPixel/s | 116.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 500.9 GTexel/s | 928.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 16.03 TFLOPS | 29.71 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 32.06 TFLOPS (2:1) | 29.71 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 140 W |

| Slot Width | Quad-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | Apple MPX | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt | 1x HDMI |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Dimensions | 267 mm length, 120 mm height | 150 mm length, 51 mm height, 150 mm width |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2021-08-02 | 2025-10-14 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,799 USD | 3,999 USD |