AMD Radeon Pro W6800X vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 160,671 compared to the NVIDIA RTX A4500's 91,671. This places the AMD card at the 97th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA card sits at the 93rd percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 delivers higher FP32 performance at 23.65 TFLOPS versus 16.03 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X. The NVIDIA card also has more shading units (7,168 versus 3,840) and a higher transistor count (28,300 million versus 26,800 million).

Q: What memory configurations do these cards offer?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus with 640.0 GB/s bandwidth, giving it higher memory bandwidth despite less capacity.

Q: Which card is better for OpenCL workloads?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 141,837, which is 12.2% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X's score of 124,498 in the same test.

Q: What are the physical differences in slot width?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is a Quad-slot card, while the NVIDIA RTX A4500 is a Dual-slot card. Both share the same 267 mm length, but the AMD card is 120 mm tall versus 112 mm for the NVIDIA.

Q: What is the production status of both cards?

A: Both the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 are listed as End-of-life products. The AMD card was released on 2021-08-02, and the NVIDIA card was released on 2021-11-22.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X and NVIDIA RTX A4500 represent two fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD card is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Navi 21 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA card uses the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This process difference gives AMD a transistor density advantage of 51.5M per mm² versus 45.1M per mm² for NVIDIA, though the NVIDIA die is larger at 628 mm² compared to 520 mm² for AMD.

Compute unit organization differs dramatically. The AMD card packs 3,840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The NVIDIA card counters with 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. NVIDIA's shading unit count is nearly double AMD's, which explains its higher FP32 throughput. The AMD card has 60 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA card has 56 RT cores plus 224 tensor cores, a feature AMD does not offer at all.

Memory architecture also diverges. AMD uses a 256-bit bus with 32 GB of GDDR6, while NVIDIA uses a wider 320-bit bus with 20 GB of GDDR6. This gives NVIDIA higher bandwidth at 640.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s, but AMD offers 12 GB more capacity. Both cards run their memory at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

The cards also differ in physical design. AMD's Radeon Pro W6800X uses the Apple MPX interface and power connector, requiring a Quad-slot footprint. NVIDIA's RTX A4500 uses a standard PCIe 4.0 x16 interface with a single 8-pin power connector in a Dual-slot design. Both share the same 267 mm length, but AMD is taller at 120 mm versus 112 mm. Both cards consume 200 W TDP and recommend a 550 W power supply.

Display outputs are another key difference. AMD provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 4x Thunderbolt outputs, while NVIDIA provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of distinct strengths. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X wins on overall average benchmark score by a wide margin. Its average of 160,671 places it 75.3% above the NVIDIA RTX A4500's average of 91,671. This overall score advantage comes from the AMD card's strong showing in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 196,844. The nearest rivals to the AMD card include the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB at 162,504, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 at 164,894, and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 at 165,217, all within 3.3% of the AMD card's score.

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins specifically in OpenCL compute. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 141,837 beats the AMD card's 124,498 by 12.2%. The NVIDIA card also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,980 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,196. The NVIDIA card's nearest rivals in average score include the RTX A4500 Mobile at 91,134, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 at 92,466, and the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87,445.

The use-case split is therefore clear. AMD's card excels in Metal-based workloads and delivers a higher overall average score, while NVIDIA's card dominates in OpenCL and offers Vulkan and DirectX 12 benchmark results of its own. The AMD card is the stronger choice for applications that leverage Metal or benefit from its 32 GB memory capacity. The NVIDIA card is better for OpenCL-heavy workflows and for systems that need a standard PCIe interface with a dual-slot footprint.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification category. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X uses the Navi 21 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA RTX A4500 uses the GA102 chip with Ampere architecture. Process nodes differ: 7 nm TSMC for AMD versus 8 nm Samsung for NVIDIA. Transistor counts are 26,800 million for AMD and 28,300 million for NVIDIA. Die sizes are 520 mm² and 628 mm² respectively.

Clock speeds show a substantial gap. AMD's base clock is 1800 MHz with a boost of 2087 MHz, while NVIDIA's base is 1050 MHz with a boost of 1650 MHz. Memory speed is identical at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective for both. Memory size differs: 32 GB for AMD versus 20 GB for NVIDIA. Bus widths are 256-bit and 320-bit respectively, with bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s for AMD and 640.0 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Compute resources differ sharply. AMD has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 60 RT cores with no tensor cores. NVIDIA has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 56 RT cores, and 224 tensor cores. Pixel rates are 200.4 GPixel/s for AMD and 158.4 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates are 500.9 GTexel/s versus 369.6 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 16.03 TFLOPS for AMD and 23.65 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 rates are 32.06 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD and 23.65 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

Physical specifications also differ. AMD is Quad-slot with Apple MPX power and bus interface. NVIDIA is Dual-slot with 1x 8-pin power and PCIe 4.0 x16 bus. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 plus 4x Thunderbolt for AMD versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for NVIDIA. Dimensions match in length at 267 mm, but heights differ at 120 mm for AMD and 112 mm for NVIDIA. Both share 200 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 2,799 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between these two cards is limited to a single shared benchmark test, but the results are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A4500 scores 141,837 against the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X's 124,498. This gives NVIDIA a 12.2% victory in this test, the only head-to-head benchmark where both cards have recorded scores.

Beyond the direct comparison, the broader benchmark records reveal the AMD card's strengths. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X records a Geekbench Metal score of 196,844 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 124,498, producing an average benchmark score of 160,671. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 141,837, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,980, and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,196, yielding an average of 91,671.

The average score gap is substantial. AMD's average is 75.3% higher than NVIDIA's, and the AMD card sits at the 97th percentile versus the 93rd percentile for NVIDIA. The AMD card's nearest rivals are all high-end workstation GPUs: the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB is 1.1% behind, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is 2.6% behind, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 is 2.8% behind, and the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation is 3.3% behind. The NVIDIA RTX A4500's nearest rivals are a different tier: the RTX A4500 Mobile is 0.6% behind, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 is 0.9% ahead, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is 4.8% behind, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is 5.2% behind.

The data shows that while NVIDIA wins the OpenCL compute test by 12.2%, the AMD card's overall benchmark average is in a different performance class entirely, matching or exceeding cards like the A100 and RTX A5500.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is the higher-performing card overall. Its average benchmark score of 160,671 versus 91,671 for the NVIDIA RTX A4500 represents a 75.3% advantage, and its 97th percentile ranking places it among the top GPUs in the database. Users who need maximum Metal performance or require 32 GB of memory capacity should choose the AMD card.

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark, beating the AMD card by 12.2% in Geekbench OpenCL. It also offers Vulkan and DirectX 12 benchmark results, a standard PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, a dual-slot form factor, and 224 tensor cores. Users running OpenCL-heavy workloads or needing a conventional workstation card with a standard power connector should choose the NVIDIA card.

The physical form factor is a deciding factor for many systems. The AMD card requires a Quad-slot footprint and Apple MPX power, which restricts it to specific Mac Pro configurations. The NVIDIA card's Dual-slot design with a single 8-pin connector fits standard PC workstations. The AMD card is taller at 120 mm versus 112 mm, though both share the same 267 mm length.

For raw compute throughput, the NVIDIA card is stronger at 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 versus 16.03 TFLOPS. For memory capacity, the AMD card offers 32 GB versus 20 GB. For memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA card wins at 640.0 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s. Both cards are end-of-life products with the same 200 W TDP.

The verdict splits cleanly: the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X is the choice for users prioritizing overall benchmark performance, Metal workloads, and large memory capacity in Apple MPX systems. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 is the choice for users prioritizing OpenCL performance, standard PCIe compatibility, dual-slot installation, and tensor core acceleration.