AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the architectural foundations of the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD104 chip, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How do the two GPUs differ in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 259.2 GB/s higher.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count and die size?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a transistor density of 65.2M per mm².

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a TDP of 55 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 100 W and no suggested PSU listed. Both use no external power connectors.

Q: What is the release timeline for these two products?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 was released on 2025-08-02, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation was released earlier on 2023-03-20. The NVIDIA part has a successor, the Blackwell-MW, while the AMD part has no successor listed.

Q: How do the shading unit and core counts compare?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 5,120 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation represent two distinct architectural approaches. The AMD part uses RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 33 chip, a design that focuses on efficiency through a 6 nm TSMC process. The chip packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The NVIDIA part uses Ada Lovelace with the AD104 chip, built on a more advanced 5 nm TSMC process. It integrates 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, achieving a higher transistor density of 121.8M per mm².

The compute resources differ substantially. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 delivers 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also includes 28 ray tracing cores but no tensor cores. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation scales much higher with 5,120 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The presence of tensor cores on the NVIDIA side indicates support for AI-accelerated workloads, a feature entirely absent from the AMD specification.

Clock behavior also separates the two. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, with memory running at 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation starts at a higher base clock of 1110 MHz and boosts to 1545 MHz, with memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). These clock differences contribute to the large gap in raw throughput.

Memory architecture diverges as well. The AMD part uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s, which is roughly 2.5 times the AMD bandwidth. The physical form factors reflect their intended use cases: the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with dimensions listed as portable device dependent.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The NVIDIA part has display outputs described as portable device dependent and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, doubling the lane count for host communication.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear split in compute capability. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation holds the advantage in every raw throughput metric. Its FP32 performance of 15.82 TFLOPS doubles the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS. The texture rate follows the same pattern: 247.2 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s. The pixel rate of 98.88 GPixel/s on the NVIDIA part exceeds the AMD's 70.40 GPixel/s.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive area for the NVIDIA part. With 432.0 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s, the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation can feed its larger 12 GB frame buffer much faster. This combination of higher bandwidth and larger capacity suits workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, such as high-resolution rendering or complex scene geometry.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins on efficiency and physical integration. Its 55 W TDP is 45 W lower than the NVIDIA part's 100 W, making it the lower-power option. The single-slot design with a 168 mm length allows installation in compact chassis, whereas the NVIDIA part is an IGP with no discrete card dimensions. The AMD part also carries four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, enabling direct multi-display configurations without adapter dependencies.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has the advantage in AI and ray tracing workloads. Its 160 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for neural network operations, while the 40 RT cores outnumber the AMD's 28. The AMD part has no tensor core equivalent, so any AI inference or training acceleration must rely on general-purpose shader execution.

For memory capacity, the NVIDIA part's 12 GB versus 8 GB gives it more headroom for texture-heavy scenes or larger model datasets. The AMD part's 8 GB remains adequate for many professional tasks, but the bandwidth ceiling limits its throughput in memory-bound scenarios.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7400 | NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Chip | Navi 33 | AD104 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 330 MHz | 1110 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 1545 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 112 | 160 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 28 | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 160 |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 98.88 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 247.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.885 TFLOPS | 15.82 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) | 15.82 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2025-08-02 | 2023-03-20 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs. Both products have an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs in the database. Without measured performance scores, the analysis relies on the specification-level differences that define their respective capabilities.

The largest computed advantage for the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation appears in FP32 throughput. Its 15.82 TFLOPS is 7.935 TFLOPS higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS, a doubling of raw compute. FP16 performance follows identically since both parts run FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32. This means the NVIDIA part sustains 15.82 TFLOPS for FP16 workloads, while the AMD part delivers 7.885 TFLOPS.

Memory bandwidth shows the second-largest gap. The NVIDIA part's 432.0 GB/s exceeds the AMD part's 172.8 GB/s by 259.2 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage, combined with the 12 GB versus 8 GB capacity difference, gives the NVIDIA part a substantial lead in memory-bound rendering tasks.

Texture rate also favors the NVIDIA part significantly. At 247.2 GTexel/s, it is 124.0 GTexel/s higher than the AMD's 123.2 GTexel/s. Pixel rate shows a narrower gap: 98.88 GPixel/s versus 70.40 GPixel/s, a difference of 28.48 GPixel/s.

The NVIDIA part's 160 tensor cores have no counterpart on the AMD side, which has no tensor core field listed. The RT core counts differ by 12, with the NVIDIA part carrying 40 RT cores against the AMD's 28. Shading units differ by 3,328, with the NVIDIA part at 5,120 and the AMD part at 1,792.

Clock speeds show the NVIDIA part operating at higher frequencies across the board. Its base clock of 1110 MHz is 780 MHz above the AMD's 330 MHz, and its boost clock of 1545 MHz is 445 MHz above the AMD's 1100 MHz. Memory clock on the NVIDIA part runs at 2250 MHz versus 1350 MHz on the AMD part.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 does hold specific advantages. Its TDP of 55 W is 45 W lower than the NVIDIA part's 100 W, making it the more power-efficient option. The single-slot form factor and 168 mm length enable installation in space-constrained systems. The four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs provide a fixed multi-display capability that the NVIDIA part, with its portable device dependent outputs, does not guarantee.

Both GPUs share the same ROP count of 64, identical API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both are produced by TSMC. The process node differs by one generation step: 6 nm for the AMD part and 5 nm for the NVIDIA part. The release dates are separated by roughly two years, with the AMD part arriving on 2025-08-02 and the NVIDIA part on 2023-03-20.