AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural similarities between the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT?

A: Both GPUs are built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. Both are manufactured by AMD on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die and a transistor density of 65.2M / mm².

Q: How do the memory configurations differ between the two cards?

A: The PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 7600 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on the same 128-bit bus but with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock also differs: 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for the PRO W7400 versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RX 7600 XT.

Q: Which card has the higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7600 XT boosts to 2755 MHz, which is substantially higher than the PRO W7400's 1100 MHz boost clock. The RX 7600 XT also has a base clock of 1980 MHz and a game clock of 2470 MHz, while the PRO W7400's base clock is 330 MHz.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The RX 7600 XT delivers 22.57 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is nearly three times the 7.885 TFLOPS of the PRO W7400. Both cards achieve the same ratio for FP16 performance at 1:1.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W, requires no power connectors, and needs a 250 W suggested PSU. The RX 7600 XT has a TDP of 190 W, uses one 8-pin power connector, and requires a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: How do the physical dimensions and slot widths compare?

A: The PRO W7400 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The RX 7600 XT is a dual-slot card measuring 204 mm in length and 115 mm in height.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits the two cards cleanly across different workloads. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT wins every benchmark category with available scores, and the margins are often wide. In PassMark G3D, the RX 7600 XT scores 17132, while the PRO W7400 has no recorded benchmark score in the database. The RX 7600 XT also holds the only entries for 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 2348, Geekbench OpenCL at 92426, and Geekbench Vulkan at 48366.

The PRO W7400 wins in thermal and physical constraints. Its 55 W TDP requires no auxiliary power connectors, while the RX 7600 XT draws 190 W and needs a single 8-pin connector. The PRO W7400 is also a single-slot card at 168 mm long, making it suitable for dense chassis layouts, while the RX 7600 XT occupies two slots and extends to 204 mm. For compute density per watt, the PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS at 55 W, whereas the RX 7600 XT delivers 22.57 TFLOPS at 190 W. The efficiency ratio favors the PRO W7400 at roughly 0.143 TFLOPS per watt versus 0.119 TFLOPS per watt for the RX 7600 XT, though the absolute compute crown belongs to the RX 7600 XT.

Display output is another area of divergence. The PRO W7400 offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs exclusively, while the RX 7600 XT provides one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The PRO W7400's configuration targets multi-display professional setups, while the RX 7600 XT adds HDMI for consumer display flexibility.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same fundamental silicon: the Navi 33 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process with RDNA 3.0 architecture and the Hotpink Bonefish codename. Transistor counts are identical at 13,300 million, and the die size matches at 204 mm². The architecture-level separation appears in how the silicon is configured and clocked.

The RX 7600 XT activates more of the chip. It has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ray tracing cores, compared to the PRO W7400's 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 28 RT cores. Both retain 64 ROPs. The RX 7600 XT's higher shader count, combined with its much higher clocks, produces 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 and 352.6 GTexel/s texture rate, while the PRO W7400 manages 7.885 TFLOPS and 123.2 GTexel/s. Pixel rates differ as well: 176.3 GPixel/s for the RX 7600 XT versus 70.40 GPixel/s for the PRO W7400.

The clock behavior reveals a fundamental design split. The PRO W7400's 330 MHz base clock and 1100 MHz boost clock suggest a power-optimized profile, while the RX 7600 XT's 1980 MHz base, 2470 MHz game, and 2755 MHz boost clocks reflect a performance-oriented profile. Both cards expose the same API surface: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card includes tensor cores, and both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface.

The production status is Active for both, but the release timeline differs. The RX 7600 XT launched on 2024-01-23 with a launch MSRP of 329 USD, while the PRO W7400 released on 2025-08-02. The RX 7600 XT lists the Navi II as predecessor and Navi IV as successor, while the PRO W7400's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega with no successor listed.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification except the ones tied to the shared silicon. Both use 6 nm TSMC manufacturing, 13,300 million transistors, a 204 mm² die, 64 ROPs, 128-bit memory bus, PCIe 4.0 x8, and identical API support.

Clock speeds: the PRO W7400 runs at 330 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost, while the RX 7600 XT runs at 1980 MHz base, 2470 MHz game, and 2755 MHz boost. Memory clock is 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity: 8 GB GDDR6 for the PRO W7400, 16 GB GDDR6 for the RX 7600 XT. Memory bandwidth: 172.8 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s.

Compute units scale with shading units: 1792 versus 2048 shading units, 112 versus 128 TMUs, and 28 versus 32 RT cores.

Throughput rates: pixel rate 70.40 GPixel/s versus 176.3 GPixel/s, texture rate 123.2 GTexel/s versus 352.6 GTexel/s, FP32 7.885 TFLOPS versus 22.57 TFLOPS, FP16 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 22.57 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and cooling: TDP 55 W versus 190 W, single-slot versus dual-slot, no power connectors versus one 8-pin, 250 W versus 450 W suggested PSU.

Physical size: 168 mm length and 69 mm height for the PRO W7400 versus 204 mm length and 115 mm height for the RX 7600 XT. Width is 20 mm for the PRO W7400, while the RX 7600 XT's width is not recorded.

Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for the PRO W7400 versus 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 for the RX 7600 XT.

The RX 7600 XT carries a launch MSRP of 329 USD, while the PRO W7400 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark scores only for the RX 7600 XT; the PRO W7400 has no recorded benchmark entries. The RX 7600 XT's average benchmark score is 17083, placing it in the 60th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 with an average score of 17037 and a delta of 0.3%, the AMD Radeon HD 7970M at 17019 with a delta of 0.4%, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 at 17208 with a delta of -0.7%, and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 at 16932 with a delta of 0.9%.

The RX 7600 XT's strongest recorded result is in Geekbench OpenCL at 92426, followed by Geekbench Vulkan at 48366. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 2348. PassMark results show 17132 in G3D, 8987 in GPU Compute, 1030 in G2D, 228 in DirectX 9, 167 in DirectX 11, 85 in DirectX 10, and 65 in DirectX 12. The direct comparison between the two cards is therefore one-sided: the RX 7600 XT leads the PRO W7400 in every benchmark category with recorded data, while the PRO W7400's benchmark profile remains empty in the database.

The percentile gap reinforces the same conclusion. The RX 7600 XT sits at the 60th percentile among all GPUs, while the PRO W7400 sits at the 50th percentile. The RX 7600 XT also has a nonzero average benchmark score of 17083, whereas the PRO W7400's average is 0. With zero wins recorded for the PRO W7400 and zero wins for the RX 7600 XT in the head-to-head field, the available evidence points entirely toward the RX 7600 XT in raw performance terms.

The Verdict

The data directs different buyers to different cards. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the clear performance choice. It delivers 22.57 TFLOPS FP32, 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, 16 GB of VRAM, and a 2755 MHz boost clock. Its benchmark scores, including 17132 in PassMark G3D and 92426 in Geekbench OpenCL, confirm substantial compute capability. The 60th percentile placement among all GPUs, alongside rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 at a -0.7% delta, positions it as a mainstream performer with measurable competitive standing.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the choice for constrained environments. Its 55 W TDP, single-slot profile, and 168 mm length make it appropriate for compact or multi-GPU systems where space and power are limited. The absence of power connectors and the 250 W suggested PSU simplify installation. Its four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs support professional multi-display configurations, and its 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 still provides functional compute for lighter workloads. The 50th percentile placement places it below the RX 7600 XT in overall standing, but its thermal envelope is unmatched in this comparison.

The architecture is identical, so the difference is configuration. The RX 7600 XT activates more shading units, TMUs, and RT cores, then clocks them far higher. It consumes 190 W to do so. The PRO W7400 dials back clocks to 1100 MHz boost and reduces active units, producing 7.885 TFLOPS at 55 W. Both share the same transistor count, die size, process node, and memory bus width. The RX 7600 XT doubles the memory capacity to 16 GB and increases bandwidth by 115.2 GB/s.

For users who prioritize raw performance, the RX 7600 XT is the only choice with recorded evidence. For users who prioritize power efficiency, physical footprint, and multi-display output, the PRO W7400 offers a distinct profile that the RX 7600 XT cannot match. The two cards occupy separate design targets despite sharing silicon, and the benchmark data fully reflects that split.