AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs NVIDIA L4 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the performance class of the NVIDIA L4 according to the database?

A: The NVIDIA L4 sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 131072 places it within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti, which scores 131938, and just 3.1% behind the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation at 135218.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 50, which reflects its position without any measured performance data.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA L4 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 300.1 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA L4 boosts to 2040 MHz, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 boosts to 1100 MHz. The L4 also has a higher base clock at 795 MHz compared to 330 MHz.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The NVIDIA L4 provides no display outputs at all.

Q: Which card has the higher transistor count and density?

A: The NVIDIA L4 uses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, resulting in 121.8M transistors per mm². The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving 65.2M transistors per mm².

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two cards into distinct roles. The NVIDIA L4 is the compute-oriented accelerator with measured performance, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is a display-equipped workstation card with no benchmark entries in the database.

For workloads requiring raw compute, the L4 is the only option with verified results. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 140838 and Vulkan score of 121306 demonstrate a functioning, high-performance part. The L4's 95th percentile ranking places it among the top GPUs in the database, and its nearest rivals confirm its standing: it trails the RTX 3090 Ti by just 0.7%, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation by 3.1%, the A10M by 3.1%, and the Radeon PRO W6800 by 3.2%. These are tight margins, meaning the L4 competes at a high tier.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores to analyze. Its 50th percentile placement is a neutral default, not a measured result. The card's specification sheet shows a compact, low-power design with 8 GB of memory and four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, but without benchmark data, its actual performance cannot be verified from the database.

Users who need a GPU with display outputs for a workstation desktop should consider the AMD card, as the NVIDIA L4 has no outputs. Users who need a passively positioned, single-slot compute accelerator with validated scores should choose the NVIDIA L4. The L4 also offers triple the memory capacity, which favors large data sets. The W7400's role is defined by its connectivity and modest power envelope, but its performance remains unquantified in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two cards. The only measured scores belong to the NVIDIA L4.

The L4's Geekbench OpenCL result of 140838 is its strongest recorded score. Its Geekbench Vulkan result of 121306 trails by approximately 14%. Both scores position the L4 near the top of the database. The nearest rival, the RTX 3090 Ti, posts an average score of 131938, which is 0.7% higher than the L4's average of 131072. The RTX 4000 Ada Generation and A10M both score 135218 and 135230 respectively, each 3.1% ahead. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135396, 3.2% ahead.

These deltas are small, indicating that the L4 performs within a few percent of several established workstation and server GPUs. The largest gap in its rival group is 3.2%, which is a narrow margin. The L4 holds its own against cards with larger physical footprints and higher power envelopes.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has no scores to compare. Its wins cannot be quantified from the database. The specification sheet suggests it will be slower in raw throughput, given its lower FP32 rating of 7.885 TFLOPS versus the L4's 30.29 TFLOPS, but no benchmark confirms or denies this.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification field.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA L4 uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 300.1 GB/s. That is 16 GB more capacity and roughly 74% more bandwidth for the L4.

Clock speeds favor the L4. Its base clock is 795 MHz and its boost clock is 2040 MHz. The W7400 runs at 330 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the W7400 runs at 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective, while the L4 runs at 1563 MHz with 12.5 Gbps effective.

Compute resources heavily favor the L4. The L4 has 7424 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, 80 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. The W7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The L4's FP32 throughput is 30.29 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS for the W7400, a factor of roughly 3.8x. FP16 rates are identical to FP32 for both cards at a 1:1 ratio.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The L4 delivers 163.2 GPixel/s and 489.6 GTexel/s. The W7400 delivers 70.40 GPixel/s and 123.2 GTexel/s.

The L4 uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the W7400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both cards are single-slot and require no auxiliary power connectors. Both list a suggested PSU of 250 W. The L4 has a TDP of 72 W, while the W7400 has a TDP of 55 W.

Physical dimensions differ slightly. The W7400 measures 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The L4 measures 169 mm in length and 56 mm in height, with no width listed. The W7400 is taller but the L4 is marginally longer.

Display outputs are a major differentiator. The W7400 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The L4 has none.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is built on the Navi 33 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The chip is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC and contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a transistor density of 65.2M per mm².

The NVIDIA L4 is built on the AD104 chip using Ada Lovelace architecture. It belongs to the Server Ada (Lxx) generation. The chip is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC and contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.8M per mm².

The L4's die is roughly 44% larger in area and holds nearly 2.7x the transistor count. Its transistor density is about 87% higher, reflecting the denser 5 nm process.

Architectural features diverge in compute focus. The L4 includes 240 tensor cores, which the W7400 lacks entirely. The L4 also has 60 RT cores versus 28 on the W7400. The L4's 7424 shading units outnumber the W7400's 1792 by more than 4x. The L4 has 240 TMUs versus 112, and 80 ROPs versus 64.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API lists are identical.

The L4's predecessor is listed as Server Ampere and its successor as Server Hopper, indicating a server product line. The W7400's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, with no successor listed.

The L4 was released on 2023-03-20, while the W7400 was released later on 2025-08-02. The L4 is a server-class part with no display outputs, while the W7400 is a workstation part with four display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA L4 wins in every measurable compute category. Its recorded Geekbench OpenCL score of 140838 and Vulkan score of 121306 provide the only verified performance data in this comparison. The L4's 95th percentile ranking and tight margins against rivals like the RTX 3090 Ti (0.7% behind) and RTX 4000 Ada Generation (3.1% behind) place it in a performance tier the W7400 cannot claim without benchmarks.

The L4 also wins on memory capacity with 24 GB versus 8 GB, and on bandwidth with 300.1 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s. Its FP32 throughput of 30.29 TFLOPS is roughly 3.8x the W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS. The L4's 240 tensor cores give it a feature the W7400 does not have, which matters for AI inference and similar workloads. Its PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width of the W7400's x8 connection.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins on display connectivity. It provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the L4 provides none. Any workload that requires driving monitors directly favors the W7400. The W7400 also has a lower TDP at 55 W versus 72 W, and it is slightly shorter at 168 mm versus 169 mm. Its taller profile at 69 mm versus 56 mm may affect clearance in some chassis, but the width of 20 mm is documented only for the AMD card.

The W7400 also wins on release recency, having launched on 2025-08-02 versus the L4's 2023-03-20. Newer architecture in the RDNA 3.0 lineage does not translate to measured performance advantages in the database, but it does mean a more recent product cycle.

For use cases, the split is clear. Compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, inference, or data processing without display output favor the L4. Desktop workstation tasks that require direct monitor connection favor the W7400, provided its performance is sufficient, which the database cannot confirm. The L4's 24 GB frame buffer is better suited for large models or high-resolution textures. The W7400's 8 GB is more modest but paired with modern DisplayPort outputs.

The L4 is the only card with benchmark evidence of its capabilities. The W7400 is a display-capable workstation card whose performance remains unverified in the database. The choice depends on whether the workload needs outputs or raw compute, and the data only supports the L4 on the latter.