AMD Radeon Pro W6900X vs AMD Radeon PRO W7800 Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and AMD Radeon Pro W6900X are both 32 GB professional GPUs, but they represent different generations and target distinct platforms. The PRO W7800 is a 2023 RDNA 3.0 card for PCIe systems, while the Pro W6900X is a 2021 RDNA 2.0 card built for Apple MPX. Despite a near-identical average benchmark score (160108 vs 160049), head-to-head tests reveal a clear performance gap in the shared workloads, and the architectural and platform differences are substantial.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share two Geekbench tests: OpenCL and Vulkan. In both, the PRO W7800 wins by a wide margin. In OpenCL, the PRO W7800 scores 154366 against the Pro W6900X's 131392, a 17.5% advantage. In Vulkan, the PRO W7800 scores 165849 against 143199, a 15.8% lead. These are not marginal differences; they represent a decisive performance tier separation in compute and graphics workloads that rely on these APIs.

However, the average benchmark scores of the two cards are almost identical: the PRO W7800 averages 160108, and the Pro W6900X averages 160049, a deltaPct of 0. This apparent contradiction is explained by the fact that the Pro W6900X has a third benchmark, Geekbench Metal, in which it scores 205557. The PRO W7800 does not have a Metal score in the dataset, so the average for the W6900X is boosted by this additional result. Since Metal is exclusive to Apple platforms, the two averages are not directly comparable across the full test suite. In the tests where both cards participate, the PRO W7800 is consistently and significantly faster.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, both cards sit at the 98th percentile of all GPUs. Their nearest rivals include each other, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X, the NVIDIA RTX A5500, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900. The PRO W7800 is 0.1% lower than the W6800X, 0.6% lower than the RTX A5500, and 3.6% lower than the PRO W7900. The Pro W6900X shows the same pattern: 0.2% lower than the W6800X, 0.6% lower than the RTX A5500, and 3.6% lower than the PRO W7900. In other words, the two cards are effectively tied on average, but that tie is driven by the Pro W6900X's Metal score, not by parity in the shared OpenCL and Vulkan tests.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 for any workload that uses OpenCL or Vulkan. It outperforms the Pro W6900X by 17.5% in OpenCL and 15.8% in Vulkan, while also offering a lower TDP (260 W vs 300 W) and a more modern architecture. The PRO W7800 is an active product, while the Pro W6900X is end-of-life. For professional users on PCIe-based systems—Windows, Linux, or standard workstations—the PRO W7800 is the unambiguous choice.

The Pro W6900X, however, is designed specifically for Apple MPX systems. Its bus interface is Apple MPX, and its display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 4x Thunderbolt, whereas the PRO W7800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. If the target platform is a Mac Pro or similar Apple workstation, the Pro W6900X is the only one of the two that can be installed, and its Metal score of 205557 indicates strong performance in Apple's native API. For Mac users, the Pro W6900X remains a viable option, but it is end-of-life, and its OpenCL and Vulkan performance lags behind the PRO W7800.

In summary, the PRO W7800 is the better card for general professional use, while the Pro W6900X is the only choice for Apple-specific systems. The near-identical average scores are misleading; the head-to-head results and the platform constraints dictate the decision.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 delivers 45.25 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X delivers 22.23 TFLOPS. The PRO W7800 is more than twice as fast in FP32.

Q: What are the memory bandwidths of the two cards?

A: The PRO W7800 has a memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s, while the Pro W6900X has 512.0 GB/s. Both use 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which card has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The Pro W6900X has more shading units (5120 vs 4480) and more ray tracing cores (80 vs 70). However, the PRO W7800 still wins in OpenCL and Vulkan due to its newer architecture and higher clock speeds.

Q: What are the launch MSRPs of the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 had a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD, and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X had a launch MSRP of 5,999 USD.

Q: Which card is end-of-life?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X is listed as end-of-life, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is active.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The PRO W7800 has a TDP of 260 W, while the Pro W6900X has a TDP of 300 W. The PRO W7800 also has a lower suggested PSU rating (600 W vs 700 W).

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon PRO W7800 | AMD Radeon Pro W6900X |

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

| Process Node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | 26,800 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 520 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 109.1M / mm² | 51.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1895 MHz | 1825 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2525 MHz | 2171 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4480 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 280 | 320 |

| RT Cores | 70 | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 323.2 GPixel/s | 277.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 707.0 GTexel/s | 694.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 45.25 TFLOPS | 22.23 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) | 44.46 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 260 W | 300 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | (not specified) |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | (not specified) |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt |

| Length | 280 mm (11 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | 110 mm (4.3 inches) | 120 mm (4.7 inches) |

| Width | 40 mm (1.6 inches) | (not specified) |

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

| Release Date | 2023-04-12 | 2021-08-02 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,499 USD | 5,999 USD |

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on different generations of AMD's RDNA architecture. The PRO W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0, while the Pro W6900X uses Navi 21 with RDNA 2.0. This generational leap is reflected in the process node: the PRO W7800 is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, whereas the Pro W6900X uses 7 nm. The transistor count more than doubles, from 26,800 million to 57,700 million, and the transistor density rises from 51.5M / mm² to 109.1M / mm², even though the die sizes are similar (529 mm² vs 520 mm²).

The RDNA 3.0 architecture brings higher clock speeds: the PRO W7800 has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost of 2525 MHz, compared to 1825 MHz and 2171 MHz for the Pro W6900X. Memory also runs faster—2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)—resulting in 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 512.0 GB/s.

Despite having fewer shading units (4480 vs 5120), fewer TMUs (280 vs 320), and fewer ray tracing cores (70 vs 80), the PRO W7800 achieves higher pixel and texture rates (323.2 GPixel/s and 707.0 GTexel/s vs 277.9 and 694.7) and more than doubles the FP32 throughput (45.25 TFLOPS vs 22.23 TFLOPS). This is a direct consequence of the newer architecture and higher clocks.

The platform interface also diverges sharply. The PRO W7800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Pro W6900X uses Apple MPX. The display outputs reflect this: the PRO W7800 provides DisplayPort 2.1 connectors, while the Pro W6900X provides HDMI 2.1 and Thunderbolt. The Pro W6900X is specifically designed for Apple's Mac Pro, while the PRO W7800 targets standard PCIe workstations. These architectural and platform differences explain the performance gap and the distinct use cases for each card.