AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550. Both entries list empty benchmark arrays, and the wins counters for each product are set to zero. The database therefore shows no direct performance comparison between these two accelerators in any workload category.

What can be compared from the available data are the raw compute specifications. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS FP32 and 52.43 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.885 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The Intel part offers roughly 6.65 times the FP32 throughput of the AMD part when calculated from these figures. Texture rate shows a similar gap: the Intel accelerator provides 1,638.4 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s for the AMD product, approximately 13.3 times higher.

Pixel rate presents a notable inversion. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is recorded at 70.40 GPixel/s, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 is listed at 0 MPixel/s. This reflects a fundamental difference in design purpose. The Intel accelerator has zero ROPs recorded, meaning it does not generate conventional rasterized pixels at all. The AMD part has 64 ROPs and is positioned for traditional graphics output.

Memory bandwidth also shows a dramatic separation. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses HBM2e with a 3.28 TB/s bandwidth across an 8192 bit bus. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses GDDR6 with 172.8 GB/s across a 128 bit bus. The Intel bandwidth is approximately 19 times higher. Memory capacity differs as well: 128 GB for Intel versus 8 GB for AMD.

Neither product has an average benchmark score above zero in the database, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. With no measured scores or nearest rival entries, any performance ranking between these two parts must be derived solely from their listed specifications.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different manufacturing and design approaches. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, from the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. It is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses the Ponte Vecchio chip with Generation 12.5 architecture, from the Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio) generation, built on a 10 nm process at Intel.

Transistor counts differ enormously. The AMD chip contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Intel chip contains 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die, giving a density of 78.1M per mm². The Intel die is roughly 6.3 times larger in area and holds about 7.5 times more transistors.

Compute unit configurations are scaled accordingly. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, 0 ROPs, and 128 ray tracing cores. The Intel part provides about 9.1 times more shading units and 9.1 times more TMUs, plus about 4.6 times more ray tracing cores. Neither product lists tensor cores in the database.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The AMD card runs a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1,100 MHz. The Intel accelerator runs a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1,600 MHz. Memory clocks are recorded as 1,350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for AMD GDDR6 and 1,600 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) for Intel HBM2e. The lower AMD boost clock reflects a low-power design target.

Power requirements separate the parts sharply. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W, is single-slot, uses no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has a TDP of 600 W, comes as an OAM Module, and suggests a 1,000 W power supply. The Intel part consumes roughly 10.9 times the power of the AMD part.

The bus interface also differs: the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel accelerator uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are exclusive to the AMD card, which provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 connectors. The Intel accelerator records no outputs. API support shows the AMD card with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan entry.

Physical dimensions are only recorded for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400: 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The Intel OAM Module has no dimensions listed. Release dates place the AMD card at 2025-08-02 and the Intel accelerator at 2023-01-09, making the Intel product roughly 2.6 years older in the database. The AMD card lists the Radeon Pro Vega as its predecessor, while the Intel accelerator lists the H3C Graphics as its successor.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data does not provide any direct test results, so win analysis must rely on architectural strengths. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its 52.43 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 figures dwarf the AMD part's 7.885 TFLOPS. Its 3.28 TB/s memory bandwidth and 128 GB capacity serve large data sets and dense compute workloads. The 1,638.4 GTexel/s texture rate indicates strong fill-rate capabilities for texture-heavy processing. The 128 ray tracing cores give it a substantial advantage in ray-traced workloads, with over 4.6 times the ray tracing hardware of the AMD part.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in conventional graphics output and efficiency. It is the only one of the two with a recorded pixel rate at 70.40 GPixel/s, enabled by its 64 ROPs. It is the only part with display outputs, offering 4x DisplayPort 2.1. Its 55 W TDP makes it suitable for environments with limited power delivery, and its 168 mm length fits standard expansion slots. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, which are absent from the Intel listing. The AMD part also carries a newer release date of 2025-08-02 versus the Intel release of 2023-01-09.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 offers no display connectivity and zero ROPs, meaning it cannot drive monitors or perform conventional rasterization. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 offers only 8 GB of memory and a 128 bit bus, limiting its capacity for very large models or datasets.

Workload types separate the two clearly. The Intel accelerator targets compute-heavy server environments where memory capacity and bandwidth are primary constraints. The AMD card targets graphics-oriented tasks where display output, rasterization, and low power draw are required.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two products with different intended roles. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS FP32, 52.43 TFLOPS FP16, 3.28 TB/s memory bandwidth, and 128 GB HBM2e. These specifications position it for large-scale compute and AI-oriented tasks that fit within its 600 W envelope. Its 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, and 128 ray tracing cores provide a massive parallel resource pool. The absence of ROPs and display outputs confirms it is not designed for graphics output.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, 7.885 TFLOPS FP16, 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, and 8 GB GDDR6. Its 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, 64 ROPs, and 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs make it a functional graphics card. Its 55 W TDP and single-slot design allow installation in compact systems with minimal power infrastructure. The 28 ray tracing cores provide some ray tracing capability, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support aligns it with modern graphics APIs.

For compute density, the Intel part provides approximately 6.65 times the FP32 throughput of the AMD part while consuming about 10.9 times the power. The Intel part provides approximately 19 times the memory bandwidth and 16 times the memory capacity. The AMD part provides the only pixel output path, the only display connectors, and a far lower power requirement.

The database records no benchmark scores for either product, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of zero. The selection between them depends entirely on workload type. Compute-heavy data center deployments align with the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550. Graphics output and low-power workstation use align with the AMD Radeon PRO W7400. The two accelerators occupy separate segments of the market, and the data does not support direct performance ranking between them.

FAQ

Q: Which product has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 7.885 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Which product can output to displays?

A: Only the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has display outputs, providing 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 records no outputs.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each product?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8192 bit bus with 3.28 TB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has a TDP of 600 W and suggests a 1,000 W power supply. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and suggests a 250 W power supply.

Q: Which product has ray tracing capability?

A: Both products have ray tracing cores. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has 128 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 28.

Q: Which product is newer in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a release date of 2025-08-02. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has a release date of 2023-01-09.