AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 occupy entirely different positions in the database. The RTX 5080 records an average benchmark score of 56083, placing it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, while the W7400 has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile. This creates an immediate and decisive performance gap, one that is visible across every architectural and specification comparison available.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 5080 delivers the only recorded benchmark results in this comparison, and the numbers indicate a dominant performance profile. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 8637 confirms strong modern API performance. The Geekbench results reinforce this, with an OpenCL score of 235901 and a Vulkan score of 255450. The PassMark suite shows a G3D score of 36565 and a compute score of 21789. The W7400 has no scores in any of these tests, so the comparative data is one-sided.

The RTX 5080 also holds a clear advantage in raw throughput figures. Its FP32 compute is 56.28 TFLOPS, which is 7.14 times the 7.885 TFLOPS of the W7400. The texture rate difference is similarly large, with the RTX 5080 producing 879.3 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s for the W7400. Pixel rate favors the RTX 5080 as well, at 293.1 GPixel/s compared to 70.40 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth is 960.0 GB/s on the RTX 5080, a 5.56 times advantage over the 172.8 GB/s of the W7400.

The RTX 5080 sits 0.6% above the AMD Radeon 8060S in average score and 0.7% above the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by 2.2%. The W7400 has no nearest rivals listed in the database, further indicating the absence of comparable measured data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use different manufacturing processes and architectures. The W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The RTX 5080 uses the GB203 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. The transistor density reflects this difference: 65.2M / mm² for the W7400 and 120.6M / mm² for the RTX 5080.

Core configurations diverge sharply. The W7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The RTX 5080 has 10752 shading units, 336 TMUs, 112 ROPs, and 84 ray tracing cores, along with 336 tensor cores. The RTX 5080 has 6 times the shading units, 3 times the TMUs, and 3 times the ray tracing cores compared to the W7400. The RTX 5080 is the only one of the two with tensor cores.

Clock behavior differs as well. The W7400 has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost of 1100 MHz, while the RTX 5080 runs at 2295 MHz base and 2617 MHz boost. The W7400 memory operates at 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective speed, while the RTX 5080 memory runs at 1875 MHz with 30 Gbps effective. Memory configuration is also different: the W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus, and the RTX 5080 has 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256 bit bus.

The power and physical profiles are distinct. The W7400 has a TDP of 55 W, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RTX 5080 has a TDP of 360 W, a single 16-pin connector, and a suggested PSU of 750 W. The W7400 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The RTX 5080 is a dual-slot card measuring 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5080 wins in every measurable performance category. The recorded data shows it leads in compute, rasterization, ray tracing, and memory throughput. Its 16 GB GDDR7 memory with a 256 bit bus and 960.0 GB/s bandwidth supports high-resolution workloads and large datasets. The 336 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI-accelerated tasks, a feature the W7400 lacks entirely. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bus bandwidth potential of the W7400's PCIe 4.0 x8 link.

The W7400 wins in efficiency and physical footprint. Its 55 W TDP is 6.55 times lower than the 360 W TDP of the RTX 5080. It requires no external power connectors and a 250 W PSU, while the RTX 5080 needs a 16-pin connector and a 750 W PSU. The single-slot, 168 mm design fits in compact chassis where the 304 mm dual-slot RTX 5080 cannot. The W7400 also offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the RTX 5080 provides 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

The W7400 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with 28 ray tracing cores, so it does support hardware ray tracing. However, the RTX 5080 has 3 times as many ray tracing cores, and its higher clock speeds and shading unit count amplify that advantage in any ray-traced workload. The W7400 has no tensor cores, meaning any AI or machine learning inference falls back to general-purpose shaders.

The Verdict

The RTX 5080 is the clear performance leader, and the data supports no other conclusion. Its 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 output, 960.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 10752 shading units place it in a different class from the W7400. The 87th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 56083 confirm this. The RTX 5080 is the choice for workloads that demand maximum compute, large memory capacity, or tensor core acceleration.

The W7400 is a low-power, compact alternative. Its 55 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for systems with strict power and space limits. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth are modest but sufficient for lighter tasks. The 50th percentile ranking reflects the absence of recorded benchmark scores, not a measured performance level, so its real-world standing cannot be verified from the database.

Users who prioritize raw performance, ray tracing, or AI features should select the RTX 5080. Users who need a low-profile, low-power GPU with DisplayPort 2.1 outputs should consider the W7400. The RTX 5080 has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the W7400 has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 5080 in FP32 compute than the W7400?

A: The RTX 5080 delivers 56.28 TFLOPS, which is 7.14 times the 7.885 TFLOPS of the W7400.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5080 has 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256 bit bus with 960.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the W7400 have tensor cores?

A: No. The W7400 has no tensor cores listed in the database, while the RTX 5080 has 336.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 5080 has 84 ray tracing cores, which is 3 times the 28 found in the W7400.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RTX 5080 has a TDP of 360 W and a suggested PSU of 750 W.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The W7400 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The RTX 5080 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon PRO W7400 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 45,600 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 378 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 120.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 330 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 2617 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz, 10.8 Gbps effective | 1875 MHz, 30 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 960.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 10752 |

| TMUs | 112 | 336 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | 84 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 336 |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 293.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 879.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.885 TFLOPS | 56.28 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) | 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 360 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 750 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| Length | 168 mm, 6.6 inches | 304 mm, 12 inches |

| Height | 69 mm, 2.7 inches | 137 mm, 5.4 inches |

| Width | 20 mm, 0.8 inches | 40 mm, 1.6 inches |

| Release Date | 2025-08-02 | 2025-01-29 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | GeForce 40 |

| Successor | None | GeForce 60 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 87 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 56083 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 999 USD |