AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs AMD Radeon RX 9050 Comparison

The Verdict

The database records two AMD graphics cards with distinctly different design goals. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is a workstation-oriented product built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon RX 9050 is a consumer-series card based on the newer RDNA 4.0 architecture. The recorded benchmark data shows a substantial performance gap between the two. The PRO W7500 has an average benchmark score of 16415, placing it in the 59th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The RX 9050 has no recorded benchmark scores and an average score of 0, placing it in the 50th percentile, which in this case reflects a lack of tested data rather than a true performance comparison. For any workload where measured performance matters, the data points squarely to the PRO W7500 as the only card with verified results. The RX 9050 remains an untested entry, so any selection between the two based on the current database must favor the PRO W7500 for its confirmed compute, graphics, and API benchmark outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations. The PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish" and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The RX 9050 uses the Navi 44 chip, built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture and belongs to the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation. This generational shift brings a change in manufacturing process. The PRO W7500 is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 9050 moves to a 4 nm process, also at TSMC. Transistor counts differ substantially: the PRO W7500 contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm². The RX 9050 packs 29,700 million transistors on a slightly smaller 199 mm² die, yielding a much higher density of 149.2 million per mm². The RX 9050's predecessor is listed as Navi III, confirming its place as the follow-up to the RDNA 3 generation, whereas the PRO W7500's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega. In terms of feature support, both cards expose the same API levels: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card includes tensor cores in the database records. The RX 9050 has no codename listed, and the PRO W7500's codename is provided. The RX 9050 is part of the Radeon RX 9000 series, a consumer gaming lineup, while the PRO W7500 is a professional workstation product, and these positioning differences are reflected in several specification fields.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the PRO W7500 versus the RX 9050. However, the PRO W7500 has a full suite of nine recorded benchmark scores, while the RX 9050 has none. The PRO W7500's Geekbench OpenCL score is 58213, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 68634. In Passmark tests, the PRO W7500 records the following: DirectX 10 score of 65, DirectX 11 score of 125, DirectX 12 score of 46, DirectX 9 score of 200, G2D score of 1174, G3D score of 13368, and GPU compute score of 5910. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 16415. The RX 9050's average benchmark score is 0, with an empty benchmarks array. The nearest rivals for the PRO W7500 provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell scores 16408, a delta of 0 percent from the PRO W7500. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16361, which is 0.3 percent behind. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16351, 0.4 percent behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 scores 16504, which is 0.5 percent ahead of the PRO W7500. These deltas show the PRO W7500 sitting in a tight performance cluster, within half a percent of its nearest competitors. For the RX 9050, no rival data exists, meaning the database offers no measured baseline for its expected performance.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge across nearly every hardware specification. Clock speeds show a trade-off between base and boost frequencies. The PRO W7500 has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1700 MHz, with no game clock listed. The RX 9050 has a lower base clock of 1330 MHz but a much higher boost clock of 2600 MHz, plus a game clock of 1920 MHz. Memory configurations are similar in capacity and type: both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The PRO W7500's memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 9050's memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, delivering 288.0 GB/s. The compute unit breakdown favors the PRO W7500 in raw counts. It has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster operations pipelines, and 28 ray tracing cores. The RX 9050 has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 64 raster operations pipelines, and 16 ray tracing cores. Pixel and texture rates follow these counts. The PRO W7500 achieves 108.8 GPixel/s and 190.4 GTexel/s, while the RX 9050 achieves 166.4 GPixel/s for pixels and 166.4 GTexel/s for textures. Floating point performance also differs: the PRO W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.37 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the RX 9050 delivers 10.65 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.65 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). Power consumption and physical design vary considerably. The PRO W7500 has a TDP of 70 W, is a single-slot card, requires no power connectors, and its dimensions are 216 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The RX 9050 has a TDP of 92 W, is a dual-slot card, requires one 8-pin power connector, and has no recorded dimensions. Both list a suggested PSU of 250 W. The bus interface differs: the PRO W7500 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 9050 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the PRO W7500 has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the RX 9050 has one HDMI 2.1b and two DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. The PRO W7500 has a launch MSRP of 429 USD, while the RX 9050 has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates place the PRO W7500 in 2023-08-02 and the RX 9050 in 2026-07-27.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 has a boost clock of 2600 MHz, compared to the PRO W7500's boost clock of 1700 MHz.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 9050 provides 288.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the PRO W7500 provides 256.0 GB/s. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit counts?

A: The PRO W7500 has 1792 shading units, whereas the RX 9050 has 1024 shading units. The PRO W7500 also has more texture mapping units (112 versus 64) and more ray tracing cores (28 versus 16). Both have 64 raster operations pipelines.

Q: Which card has a higher recorded average benchmark score?

A: The PRO W7500 has an average benchmark score of 16415, while the RX 9050 has an average benchmark score of 0 due to no recorded benchmark entries.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The PRO W7500 has a TDP of 70 W and requires no power connectors, while the RX 9050 has a TDP of 92 W and requires one 8-pin power connector. Both list a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: How do the architectures differ between the two cards?

A: The PRO W7500 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip on a 6 nm process, while the RX 9050 uses the RDNA 4.0 architecture with the Navi 44 chip on a 4 nm process. The RX 9050 has a higher transistor count of 29,700 million versus 13,300 million for the PRO W7500.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded data, the PRO W7500 holds the advantage in areas where measurements exist. Its shading unit count of 1792 is 75 percent higher than the RX 9050's 1024, and its texture mapping unit count of 112 is 75 percent higher than the RX 9050's 64. Its FP32 throughput of 12.19 TFLOPS exceeds the RX 9050's 10.65 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput of 24.37 TFLOPS is more than double the RX 9050's 10.65 TFLOPS. The PRO W7500 also produces a higher texture rate of 190.4 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s, and it has more ray tracing cores at 28 versus 16. Its average benchmark score of 16415 versus 0 for the RX 9050 means the database has verified performance for the PRO W7500 only. The PRO W7500 also occupies a single slot and draws 70 W, making it a lower-power, more compact option than the RX 9050's dual-slot, 92 W design. The RX 9050, however, wins on several architectural and interface fronts. Its boost clock of 2600 MHz is substantially higher than the PRO W7500's 1700 MHz, and its game clock of 1920 MHz provides a reference point the PRO W7500 lacks. Its memory speed of 18 Gbps effective and bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s exceed the PRO W7500's 16 Gbps and 256.0 GB/s. Its pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s is higher than the PRO W7500's 108.8 GPixel/s. The RX 9050 uses a newer 4 nm process with a transistor density of 149.2 million per mm², more than double the PRO W7500's 65.2 million per mm². Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the lane count and doubles the generation speed compared to the PRO W7500's PCIe 4.0 x8. The RX 9050 also includes an HDMI 2.1b output, which the PRO W7500 does not offer. For use cases that depend on verified compute and graphics benchmark results, the PRO W7500 is the only card with supporting data. For scenarios that prioritize newer process technology, higher clocks, faster memory, and a more modern bus interface, the RX 9050's specifications point in that direction, but no benchmark confirmation exists in the database.