AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data places both the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, with identical average benchmark scores of zero. This parity indicates that, in the absence of direct head-to-head measurements, neither card demonstrates a measurable performance advantage over the other in the database's current records. The AMD part targets a professional desktop workstation role with a single-slot form factor and four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the NVIDIA part is an integrated mobile GPU with no dedicated slot width, designed for portable devices. Users requiring a fixed workstation setup with multiple display outputs should select the AMD Radeon PRO W7400; users needing a low-power embedded solution for a laptop or compact system should select the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation. The data shows no benchmark-based winner, so the choice rests entirely on form factor, power envelope, and memory capacity.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It is fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process containing 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process containing 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip packs significantly more transistors into a smaller area, indicating a denser design. The AMD GPU has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster output units, and 28 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA GPU has 2,048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 raster output units, 16 ray tracing cores, and 64 tensor cores. The AMD card includes more texture units and raster outputs, while the NVIDIA card carries more shading units and adds tensor cores for AI workloads, a feature the AMD part lacks entirely. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity holds. The AMD part operates with a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz, while the NVIDIA part runs at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 2025 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU's higher clock speeds compensate for its lower count of texture units and raster outputs, resulting in a texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s against the AMD's 123.2 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 64.80 GPixel/s against the AMD's 70.40 GPixel/s. The AMD card achieves a slightly higher pixel fill rate despite lower clocks, thanks to its larger raster output unit count.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. It offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth, double the capacity and 35% more bandwidth than the NVIDIA alternative. This makes the AMD card suitable for workloads with large texture datasets or multi-display rendering at high resolutions, where memory footprint and fill rate matter. The AMD card also provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, enabling multi-monitor professional setups directly from a single slot. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation wins in raw compute throughput and power efficiency. It delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 7.885 TFLOPS for the AMD card, a 5.2% advantage in peak floating-point throughput. Its 64 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI inference and deep learning tasks, which the AMD card cannot accelerate. The NVIDIA GPU's 35 W TDP is 36% lower than the AMD card's 55 W TDP, making it the better choice for thermally constrained portable systems. The NVIDIA part also has a higher transistor density and smaller die, indicating a more compact implementation suited for integration into laptops. The AMD card's higher pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s versus 64.80 GPixel/s suggests an advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios such as high-resolution rasterization with multiple render targets.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation achieves 8.294 TFLOPS, slightly higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has a 55 W TDP, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has a 35 W TDP.

Q: Which GPU supports more display outputs?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation's display outputs are portable device dependent.

Q: Do either of these GPUs include tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation includes 64 tensor cores; the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 has no tensor core count listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark records for these two GPUs, with zero wins recorded for each side and an empty benchmark array. However, the specification data allows for direct comparisons on several performance metrics. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation leads in FP32 compute with 8.294 TFLOPS, surpassing the AMD Radeon PRO W7400's 7.885 TFLOPS by 0.409 TFLOPS, a 5.2% margin. The NVIDIA part also leads in texture rate at 129.6 GTexel/s, beating the AMD card's 123.2 GTexel/s by 6.4 GTexel/s, a 5.2% advantage. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 leads in pixel rate at 70.40 GPixel/s, exceeding the NVIDIA GPU's 64.80 GPixel/s by 5.6 GPixel/s, an 8.6% margin. Memory bandwidth favors the AMD card decisively: 172.8 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s, a 44.8 GB/s difference or 35% higher bandwidth. The AMD card's memory clock runs at 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective data rate, while the NVIDIA card's memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective data rate. The NVIDIA GPU's higher memory clock does not overcome its narrower 64-bit bus, which halves the effective bandwidth compared to the AMD card's 128-bit bus. In terms of clocks, the NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 2025 MHz, while the AMD GPU has a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU's boost clock is 925 MHz higher, an 84% advantage, yet the AMD card still achieves a higher pixel rate due to its 64 raster output units versus the NVIDIA's 32. The AMD card also has more texture mapping units (112 versus 64), but the NVIDIA GPU's higher clocks close the texture rate gap. The transistor counts differ substantially: 18,900 million for NVIDIA versus 13,300 million for AMD, a 5,600 million transistor difference. The NVIDIA part's die is smaller at 159 mm² compared to 204 mm², and its transistor density of 118.9M per mm² is nearly double the AMD card's 65.2M per mm². These architectural differences explain why the NVIDIA GPU can deliver higher compute throughput and texture rate despite fewer texture mapping units and raster outputs.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm process node, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation uses a 5 nm node. Transistor counts are 13,300 million for AMD and 18,900 million for NVIDIA. Die sizes are 204 mm² for AMD and 159 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor density measures 65.2M per mm² for AMD and 118.9M per mm² for NVIDIA. Base clocks are 330 MHz for AMD and 1485 MHz for NVIDIA. Boost clocks are 1100 MHz for AMD and 2025 MHz for NVIDIA. Memory clocks are 1350 MHz with 10.8 Gbps effective for AMD and 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective for NVIDIA. Memory size is 8 GB for AMD and 4 GB for NVIDIA. Memory bus width is 128 bit for AMD and 64 bit for NVIDIA. Memory bandwidth is 172.8 GB/s for AMD and 128.0 GB/s for NVIDIA. Shading units number 1792 for AMD and 2048 for NVIDIA. Texture mapping units number 112 for AMD and 64 for NVIDIA. Raster output units number 64 for AMD and 32 for NVIDIA. Ray tracing cores number 28 for AMD and 16 for NVIDIA. Tensor cores are absent for AMD and number 64 for NVIDIA. Pixel rates are 70.40 GPixel/s for AMD and 64.80 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates are 123.2 GTexel/s for AMD and 129.6 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 performance is 7.885 TFLOPS for AMD and 8.294 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 performance is 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD and 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA. TDP is 55 W for AMD and 35 W for NVIDIA. Slot width is single-slot for AMD and IGP for NVIDIA. Power connectors are none for both. Suggested PSU is 250 W for AMD and null for NVIDIA. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for both. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD and portable device dependent for NVIDIA. Dimensions are 168 mm length, 69 mm height, 20 mm width for AMD and null for NVIDIA. Release dates are 2025-08-02 for AMD and 2024-02-25 for NVIDIA. The AMD card's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega with no successor listed; the NVIDIA card's predecessor is Ampere-MW with a successor of Blackwell-MW. Both GPUs are marked as active in production status. Both have null launch MSRP values in the database.