AMD Radeon Pro W6900X vs NVIDIA Quadro GP100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X scores 130,035, while the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 records 87,445. That is a 48.7% advantage for the AMD card. In practical terms, the W6900X delivers nearly half again as much compute throughput in this OpenCL workload, a gap large enough to shift project timelines and render queue priorities.

Looking at the broader database averages reinforces the separation. The W6900X holds an average benchmark score of 168,574 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro GP100, with only its OpenCL result on record, averages 87,445 and sits in the 93rd percentile. The percentile gap, while narrower than the raw score gap, still places the two cards in different performance tiers. The W6900X is near the top of the entire database; the GP100 is merely above average.

The W6900X also has results in two other benchmark categories that the GP100 lacks entirely. In Geekbench Metal, the AMD card scores 226,821, and in Geekbench Vulkan it scores 148,865. These are not directly comparable to anything on the GP100 side, but they do show that the W6900X maintains consistently high throughput across multiple API families. The OpenCL result is not an outlier for AMD; it is the lowest of its three recorded scores, which suggests the hardware scales well across different compute interfaces.

For the GP100, the absence of Metal and Vulkan results in the database is itself informative. The card, built on the Pascal architecture, supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3, but its DirectX support stops at 12 (12_1). The W6900X supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API support gap mirrors the performance gap: the newer AMD architecture is equipped for modern workloads, while the NVIDIA card is anchored to an earlier generation of graphics features.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute-heavy tasks. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X leads the only head-to-head benchmark by 48.7%, holds a 92.8% higher average benchmark score (168,574 vs. 87,445), and sits 4 percentile points higher in the global distribution. If the task is raw OpenCL compute, the choice is unambiguous.

However, the Quadro GP100 is not without merit in specific contexts. Its 16 GB of HBM2 memory delivers 732.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 43% higher than the W6900X's 512.0 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound, the GP100 could hold an advantage. The card also draws 235 W versus 300 W, and its suggested power supply is 550 W versus 700 W, making it a lighter load on system power budgets.

The verdict, strictly from the recorded data: the W6900X is the superior compute card by a wide margin, but the GP100 may be the better choice for niche memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks where its HBM2 bandwidth matters more than raw FP32 throughput. For anyone running general-purpose compute, rendering, or machine learning inference, the W6900X's 22.23 TFLOPS FP32 versus 10.34 TFLOPS for the GP100 is a 115% advantage that will be felt in every benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X wins in compute throughput across the board. Its FP32 rate of 22.23 TFLOPS doubles the GP100's 10.34 TFLOPS. Its FP16 rate of 44.46 TFLOPS (2:1) similarly doubles the GP100's 20.69 TFLOPS (2:1). Pixel fill rate is 277.9 GPixel/s versus 138.5 GPixel/s, a 100.6% advantage. Texture fill rate is 694.7 GTexel/s versus 323.2 GTexel/s, a 114.9% advantage. The W6900X also has more hardware resources: 5,120 shading units versus 3,584, 320 TMUs versus 224, and 128 ROPs versus 96. It adds 80 ray-tracing cores, which the GP100 lacks entirely.

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 wins in memory bandwidth. Its 732.2 GB/s exceeds the W6900X's 512.0 GB/s by 43%. This is driven by a 4,096-bit bus width, versus 256-bit for the AMD card, and HBM2 memory versus GDDR6. For workloads that stream large datasets and are limited by memory transfer speed, the GP100's bandwidth advantage is the deciding factor. The GP100 also has a lower TDP of 235 W versus 300 W, and a lower suggested PSU of 550 W versus 700 W, which may matter in constrained system builds.

In API support, the W6900X wins with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1), and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.3. The GP100 does offer a DVI output and four DisplayPort 1.4a connections, while the W6900X provides one HDMI 2.1 and four Thunderbolt ports. The Thunderbolt implementation on the AMD card is unique in this comparison, enabling high-bandwidth external connectivity.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X has an average benchmark score of 168,574 across all recorded tests, while the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 averages 87,445. The W6900X leads by 92.8%.

Q: How much faster is the AMD card in OpenCL?

A: The W6900X scores 130,035 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 87,445 for the GP100, a 48.7% advantage for AMD.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card have any memory advantage?

A: Yes. The Quadro GP100 has 732.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth from 16 GB of HBM2 on a 4,096-bit bus. The W6900X has 512.0 GB/s from 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The GP100's bandwidth is 43% higher.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X has ray-tracing cores, specifically 80 of them. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has no ray-tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The W6900X has a 300 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 700 W. The GP100 has a 235 W TDP and a suggested power supply of 550 W.

Q: Which card is better for modern graphics APIs?

A: The W6900X supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GP100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD card is more current in API support.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X uses the Navi 21 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 26,800 million transistors onto a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.5 million per mm². The architecture includes 80 ray-tracing cores, a feature set aligned with DirectX 12 Ultimate. The card is designed for the Apple MPX bus interface and supports 1x HDMI 2.1 plus 4x Thunderbolt outputs.

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 uses the GP100 chip built on Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 15,300 million transistors on a larger 610 mm² die, resulting in a lower transistor density of 25.1 million per mm². The Pascal architecture predates ray tracing and tensor cores, so neither appears in the specifications. The GP100 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface and provides 1x DVI plus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

The memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The W6900X uses 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 2000 MHz memory clock (16 Gbps effective). The GP100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 4,096-bit bus with 715 MHz memory clock (1430 Mbps effective). This explains the bandwidth reversal: the GP100's massive bus width compensates for its lower clock speed.

The process node difference is significant. The 7 nm process on the W6900X allows for more than double the transistor density of the 16 nm GP100, which contributes to the performance gap while keeping the die smaller. The W6900X also has a higher boost clock at 2171 MHz versus 1443 MHz for the GP100, further widening the compute gap.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The W6900X adds 80 ray-tracing cores; the GP100 has none.

Clock speeds favor AMD: base 1825 MHz versus 1304 MHz, boost 2171 MHz versus 1443 MHz. Memory clocks also differ, with the W6900X at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) and the GP100 at 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective).

Memory capacity and type diverge: 32 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus for AMD, 16 GB HBM2 on a 4,096-bit bus for NVIDIA. Bandwidth favors NVIDIA at 732.2 GB/s versus 512.0 GB/s.

Compute rates: FP32 is 22.23 TFLOPS for AMD versus 10.34 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 is 44.46 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD versus 20.69 TFLOPS (2:1) for NVIDIA. Pixel rate is 277.9 GPixel/s versus 138.5 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 694.7 GTexel/s versus 323.2 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specs: TDP is 300 W for AMD versus 235 W for NVIDIA. Suggested PSU is 700 W versus 550 W. The GP100 is dual-slot with a single 8-pin power connector; the W6900X lists no slot width or power connector details. Both cards are 267 mm long, but heights differ: 120 mm for AMD versus 111 mm for NVIDIA.

Bus interfaces and outputs: AMD uses Apple MPX, NVIDIA uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 plus 4x Thunderbolt for AMD, and 1x DVI plus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for NVIDIA.

Process and die details: AMD uses 7 nm TSMC with 26,800 million transistors on 520 mm². NVIDIA uses 16 nm TSMC with 15,300 million transistors on 610 mm². Transistor density is 51.5M/mm² for AMD versus 25.1M/mm² for NVIDIA.

Release timing: the W6900X launched on 2021-08-02 with a launch MSRP of 5,999 USD. The GP100 launched on 2016-09-30 with no launch MSRP recorded. Both are end-of-life products. The GP100 has a predecessor (Quadro Maxwell) and successor (Quadro Volta); the W6900X lists neither.