AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and NVIDIA H20 NVL16 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The Radeon PRO W7400 is a compact, low-power workstation card built around the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture. The H20 NVL16 is a server module built around the GH100 chip with Hopper architecture, designed for data center deployment with no display outputs at all.

From the recorded data, the H20 NVL16 delivers roughly five times the FP32 throughput of the W7400, with 39.54 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS. It also carries twelve times the memory capacity at 96 GB versus 8 GB, and memory bandwidth jumps from 172.8 GB/s to 4.03 TB/s. The H20 NVL16 is the clear choice for compute-heavy server workloads, large model inference, and tasks that require massive memory pools.

The Radeon PRO W7400, by contrast, is the only one of the two with display outputs, offering four DisplayPort 2.1 connections. It also runs on a 55 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 250 W, making it suitable for single-slot workstation installations where power and space are constrained. The H20 NVL16 draws 400 W and requires a suggested PSU of 800 W, and it ships as an SXM module rather than a standard PCIe card.

Benchmark results indicate both cards sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0. That means the database currently records no measured performance advantages for either card over the other. The decision therefore falls to the workload: rendering and display-driven tasks point to the W7400, while memory-heavy server compute points to the H20 NVL16.

Architecture Differences

The two cards share TSMC as their foundry, but the process nodes differ. The W7400 uses a 6 nm process, while the H20 NVL16 uses a 5 nm process. Transistor counts reflect the scale difference: the W7400 packs 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, for a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The H20 NVL16 packs 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, for a density of 98.3M per mm².

The W7400 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation under the codename Hotpink Bonefish, using RDNA 3.0 architecture. It includes 28 ray tracing cores, 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. Its FP16 throughput matches its FP32 throughput at 7.885 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it a functional graphics card for desktop applications.

The H20 NVL16 belongs to the Server Hopper generation and uses Hopper architecture. It contains 9,984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, 24 render output units, and 312 tensor cores. The absence of listed ray tracing cores and the presence of tensor cores indicate a compute-first design. Its FP16 throughput reaches 79.07 TFLOPS, exactly double its FP32 figure of 39.54 TFLOPS, reflecting a 2:1 ratio typical of tensor-accelerated server parts. The H20 NVL16 lists no graphics API support, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked as N/A. This is a server accelerator, not a display adapter.

The W7400 uses GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the H20 NVL16 uses HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus. The memory clock values differ as well: the W7400 runs at 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective, while the H20 NVL16 runs at 1313 MHz with 5.3 Gbps effective. The effective data rate is lower on the H20, but the extremely wide bus produces the massive bandwidth advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two cards. The winsA and winsB fields both record 0. The average benchmark score for each card is 0, and each sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. Without measured benchmark data, direct performance comparisons must rely on the recorded specification differences.

The most decisive specification gap is FP32 throughput. The H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS against the W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly five times. In FP16, the gap widens: 79.07 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS, approximately ten times. The H20 NVL16 also holds a substantial texture rate advantage at 617.8 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s.

The W7400 wins in pixel rate. It delivers 70.40 GPixel/s against the H20 NVL16's 47.52 GPixel/s. This aligns with the W7400's role as a rasterization-capable workstation card with 64 render output units, versus the H20's 24 render output units. For pixel-heavy graphics workloads, the W7400 holds the advantage.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the H20 NVL16. The recorded 4.03 TB/s bandwidth is more than twenty times the W7400's 172.8 GB/s. Memory capacity follows suit: 96 GB versus 8 GB, a twelve-fold difference. The H20 NVL16's 6144-bit bus width dwarfs the W7400's 128-bit bus.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The W7400 has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. The H20 NVL16 has a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz. The H20 runs at substantially higher clocks, though it does so at a far higher power envelope.

The W7400 supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the H20 NVL16 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The H20's interface offers more lanes and a newer generation, which matters for data transfer in server environments. The W7400's PCIe 4.0 x8 remains adequate for a workstation card of its class.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7400 | NVIDIA H20 NVL16 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Hopper |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 80,000 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 814 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 98.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 330 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 96 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 6144 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 4.03 TB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz, 10.8 Gbps effective | 1313 MHz, 5.3 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 9984 |

| TMUs | 112 | 312 |

| ROPs | 64 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 28 | Not listed |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 312 |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 617.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.885 TFLOPS | 39.54 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) | 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 400 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 800 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Dimensions | 168 mm length, 69 mm height, 20 mm width | Not listed |

| Release Date | August 2025 | September 2025 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Server Ada |

| Successor | Not listed | Server Blackwell |

The W7400 measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. It fits in a single slot and requires no external power connectors. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded dimensions and uses an SXM Module form factor, which is not a standard PCIe slot installation.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more FP32 compute power?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS. The H20 NVL16 provides roughly five times the FP32 throughput.

Q: Can the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 drive displays?

A: No. The H20 NVL16 lists no display outputs and has no graphics API support, with DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all marked as N/A. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The H20 NVL16 carries 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus, while the W7400 carries 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The H20 NVL16 offers twelve times the capacity and more than twenty times the bandwidth at 4.03 TB/s versus 172.8 GB/s.

Q: Which card has better tensor compute support?

A: The H20 NVL16 includes 312 tensor cores and reaches 79.07 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, double its FP32 rate. The W7400 lists no tensor cores and runs FP16 at the same rate as FP32 at 7.885 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W and a suggested PSU of 800 W. The W7400 requires no external power connectors, while the H20 NVL16's power connector configuration is not listed.

Q: Which card is newer?

A: The W7400 has a release date of August 2025, and the H20 NVL16 has a release date of September 2025. The H20 NVL16 is the more recent release by roughly one month.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in workstation graphics roles. Its four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and Vulkan 1.4 support make it the only one of the two that can present to a screen. Its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s exceeds the H20 NVL16's 47.52 GPixel/s, which indicates stronger rasterization throughput per render output unit. The 55 W TDP and single-slot design with no external power connectors allow installation in compact systems with a 250 W suggested PSU. Its 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width define a small physical footprint. For desktop or rack workstation tasks that need graphics output, OpenGL rendering, or DirectX-based applications, the W7400 is the functional choice.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 wins in server compute roles. Its 96 GB of HBM3 memory and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth suit large datasets and model weights that would not fit in the W7400's 8 GB pool. Its 39.54 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 79.07 TFLOPS FP16 throughput provide the raw arithmetic capacity for training and inference workloads. The 312 tensor cores are built for matrix operations, an area where the W7400 has no listed hardware. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the lane count and advances a generation over the W7400's PCIe 4.0 x8. The H20 NVL16's 6144-bit memory bus and 5 nm process node with 80,000 million transistors place it in a different performance class entirely.

The recorded data shows no benchmark wins for either card, since both average benchmark scores sit at 0 and both rank at the 50th percentile. The specification gaps define the separation. The W7400 is the only card with display capability, the only one with graphics API support, and the only one with a standard slot width. The H20 NVL16 is the only one with tensor cores, the only one with HBM3, and the only one with a PCIe 5.0 interface. Each card wins in the category its architecture targets: graphics output and rasterization for the W7400, memory bandwidth and compute density for the H20 NVL16.