AMD Radeon Pro W6800X vs NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one directly comparable benchmark between these two workstation GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X records a score of 124,498, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79,091. The delta is 57.4% in favor of the AMD card. This is not a marginal lead. The AMD part is more than one and a half times faster in raw compute throughput as measured by OpenCL, a critical API for many professional rendering and simulation workloads.

Looking beyond the direct comparison, each card's position among its nearest rivals reveals more context. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X sits at the 97th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 160,671. Its closest competitors include the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (average 162,504, only 1.1% higher), the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 (164,894, 2.6% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A5500 (165,217, 2.8% higher), and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166,094, 3.3% higher). These deltas are small. The W6800X is effectively trading blows with some of the most powerful professional accelerators ever made, despite being an end-of-life product from 2021.

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile, by contrast, holds the 91st percentile with an average score of 70,140. Its nearest rivals are much lower in absolute performance: the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (69,986, 0.2% behind the A3000 Mobile), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (69,870, 0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829, 1% ahead), and the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69,000, 1.7% behind). The A3000 Mobile is competitive within its class, but that class is a full tier below the W6800X. The gap in average benchmark score between the two cards is 90,531 points, which is a 129% difference relative to the laptop card. The OpenCL head-to-head delta of 57.4% actually understates the overall performance chasm, because the AMD card also has a Geekbench Metal score of 196,844, a test the NVIDIA card does not appear in.

Architecture Differences

The underlying silicon tells a story of two very different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X uses the Navi 21 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. It packs 26,800 million transistors into a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.5 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile uses the GA104 chip on Ampere architecture, made by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, with a density of 44.4 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip is larger, denser, and built on a more advanced process node.

Clock behavior is starkly different. The AMD card runs at a base of 1800 MHz and boosts to 2087 MHz, while the NVIDIA mobile part starts at just 600 MHz and boosts to 1230 MHz. That difference in boost clock, 857 MHz, is enormous. It explains much of the performance gap. The AMD card also runs its memory at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, while the NVIDIA card's memory runs at 1375 MHz with 11 Gbps effective. Memory configuration reinforces the separation: the W6800X has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the A3000 Mobile has 6 GB on a 192-bit bus at 264.0 GB/s. The AMD card offers more than five times the capacity and nearly double the bandwidth.

Compute resource counts diverge in interesting ways. The NVIDIA card actually has more shading units (4096 versus 3840), but the AMD card has far more texture mapping units (240 versus 128) and more raster operation units (96 versus 64). The AMD card also has 60 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA card has 32. The NVIDIA card counters with 128 tensor cores, a feature the AMD card lacks entirely. This suggests the NVIDIA part is designed for workloads that leverage tensor operations, while the AMD part focuses on raw raster and texture throughput. The pixel rate is 200.4 GPixel/s on AMD versus 78.72 GPixel/s on NVIDIA, and texture rate is 500.9 GTexel/s versus 157.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 16.03 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS. The FP16 picture is more complex: AMD delivers 32.06 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio, while NVIDIA delivers 10.08 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio, meaning the AMD card's FP16 advantage is even larger than its FP32 lead.

Power envelopes could not be more different. The AMD card is a 200 W desktop part with a quad-slot cooler and Apple MPX power connectors, requiring a 550 W power supply. The NVIDIA card is a 70 W mobile part with no power connectors, drawing its power from the PCIe slot. This is a fundamental design tradeoff. The AMD card is a workstation behemoth; the NVIDIA card is a laptop component.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X has an average benchmark score of 160,671, which places it at the 97th percentile. The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has an average of 70,140, at the 91st percentile. The AMD card's average is 129% higher.

Q: How do the two compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: In the only direct head-to-head benchmark, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X scores 124,498 versus 79,091 for the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile. The AMD card wins by 57.4%.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD card has 32 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus, providing 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has 6 GB of GDDR6 across a 192-bit bus, providing 264.0 GB/s. The AMD card has 26 GB more memory and 248 GB/s more bandwidth.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card have any unique compute features?

A: Yes. The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has 128 tensor cores, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X has none. The NVIDIA card also has a different FP16 implementation: 10.08 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio, versus the AMD card's 32.06 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X has a 200 W TDP, uses Apple MPX power connectors, and suggests a 550 W power supply. It occupies a quad-slot form factor. The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has a 70 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has 4096 shading units, which is 256 more than the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X's 3840. However, the AMD card has more TMUs (240 versus 128), ROPs (96 versus 64), and ray tracing cores (60 versus 32).

The Verdict

The data points to a decisive overall winner for raw performance: the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X. It leads in the only direct benchmark by 57.4%, has an average benchmark score more than double that of the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile, and sits 6 percentile points higher in the global distribution. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB and the RTX 4500 Ada Generation, both of which it trails by only 1.1% and 3.3% respectively. That is elite company.

However, the verdict is not a simple recommendation of one over the other. These are different classes of hardware serving different physical contexts. The AMD card is a 200 W, quad-slot, desktop-only unit with Apple MPX connectors. The NVIDIA card is a 70 W mobile component with no external power. No laptop can accommodate the AMD card. No desktop workstation slot can accommodate the NVIDIA card's intended mobile chassis. The choice is not between two competing products for the same system; it is between two entirely different platforms.

For a Mac Pro owner or a workstation that supports Apple MPX, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is the clear performance choice. For a mobile workstation that requires a 70 W GPU with tensor cores, the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile is the only viable option among these two. The NVIDIA card's 128 tensor cores give it a capability the AMD card lacks entirely, which could matter for workloads that leverage those cores. But for pure compute throughput as measured by OpenCL and Metal, the AMD card is the unambiguous winner.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W6800X | NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 26,800 million | 17,400 million |

| Die Size | 520 mm² | 392 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 51.5M / mm² | 44.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1800 MHz | 600 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2087 MHz | 1230 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1375 MHz (11 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 264.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3840 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 240 | 128 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 | 32 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 128 |

| Pixel Rate | 200.4 GPixel/s | 78.72 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 500.9 GTexel/s | 157.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 16.03 TFLOPS | 10.08 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 32.06 TFLOPS (2:1) | 10.08 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | Quad-slot | Not listed |

| Power Connectors | Apple MPX | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2021-08-02 | 2021-04-11 |

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

| Predecessor | Not listed | Quadro Turing-M |

| Successor | Not listed | Ada-MW |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X wins every measured performance category except for shading unit count. It wins OpenCL by 57.4%, has a higher average benchmark score by 129%, and holds a 97th percentile ranking versus 91st. It wins on memory capacity (32 GB versus 6 GB), memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s versus 264.0 GB/s), texture rate (500.9 GTexel/s versus 157.4 GTexel/s), pixel rate (200.4 GPixel/s versus 78.72 GPixel/s), FP32 (16.03 TFLOPS versus 10.08 TFLOPS), FP16 (32.06 versus 10.08), ray tracing cores (60 versus 32), and TMUs (240 versus 128). It also has a higher boost clock by 857 MHz and a smaller process node at 7 nm versus 8 nm. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB and RTX 4500 Ada Generation, which are desktop data center and workstation cards, not mobile parts.

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile wins on portability and specific feature support. It has 128 tensor cores, which the AMD card does not have. It has more shading units (4096 versus 3840). It draws 130 W less power (70 W versus 200 W) and requires no external power connectors. It uses the PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, which is a standard desktop and mobile bus, while the AMD card requires Apple MPX. It also has a larger FP16 ratio of 1:1 versus the AMD card's 2:1, which means its FP16 throughput is not artificially doubled. Its nearest rivals are the Quadro P6000 and Radeon Pro WX 8200, both older desktop workstation cards, and the Radeon RX 6600 LE, a consumer desktop GPU. The NVIDIA card holds its own in that group, with deltas under 2% in either direction.

For a user who needs maximum compute throughput in a desktop Mac Pro environment, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is the only choice. For a user who needs a 70 W mobile GPU with tensor core support for portable workstations, the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile is the only choice. The data does not present a scenario where both cards are viable options for the same machine. The performance gap is real and large, but it is a gap between a desktop powerhouse and a mobile efficiency part.