AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 and the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. This absence of comparative measurements is itself informative. The Radeon PRO W7500 has a recorded average benchmark score of 16415, placing it at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, indicating that no performance data has been captured for it in the database.

For the W7500, the individual benchmark scores show a clear application profile. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 68634 is notably higher than its OpenCL score of 58213, suggesting strong graphics API performance. In Passmark testing, the G3D score of 13368 dwarfs the GPU compute score of 5910, indicating that the card is substantially better optimized for traditional rendering workloads than for general-purpose compute tasks. The DirectX 9 score of 200 is the highest among the DirectX tests, while DirectX 12 scores only 46, which may reflect driver maturity or architectural priorities rather than raw capability.

The W7500's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its positioning. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell averages 16408, a delta of 0 percent from the W7500's average. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16361, just 0.3 percent lower. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M follows at 16351, a 0.4 percent deficit. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 leads the group with 16504, putting the W7500 0.5 percent behind. These margins are remarkably tight, placing the W7500 in a dense competitive cluster where no single product holds a decisive lead.

The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, without any recorded benchmarks, cannot be compared directly. Its 50th percentile rank is a placeholder derived from its specifications rather than measurements. The data indicates that any performance assessment of this chip must rely on architectural analysis rather than empirical results.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share a common manufacturing foundation but diverge sharply in design philosophy. Both use a 6 nm process node at TSMC. The W7500 packs 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm². The Z2 Go GPU uses 13,100 million transistors on a slightly larger 208 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 63.0 million per mm². The close transistor counts but different die sizes hint at distinct layout priorities.

The architectural generation gap is significant. The W7500 is built on RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, from the Radeon Pro Navi III Series. The Z2 Go GPU uses RDNA 2.0 with the Rembrandt+ chip, classified under Console GPU (AMD). This generational difference explains the substantial gap in compute resources. The W7500 fields 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. The Z2 Go GPU has only 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The ray tracing core count tells a similar story: 28 for the W7500 versus 12 for the Z2 Go GPU.

Clock behavior further separates the two. The W7500 runs at a base of 1500 MHz and boosts to 1700 MHz, a conservative range that prioritizes sustained professional workloads. The Z2 Go GPU has a much wider envelope, starting at just 800 MHz and boosting to 2700 MHz. This suggests a power-adaptive design that can scale aggressively when thermal and power budgets allow. The memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The W7500 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Z2 Go GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but only achieves 102.4 GB/s. The W7500's memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the Z2 Go's memory runs at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective).

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The W7500 lists no tensor cores, and neither does the Z2 Go GPU. The power profiles diverge dramatically: the W7500 is rated at 70 W TDP, while the Z2 Go GPU sips just 28 W. The W7500 is a single-slot card requiring no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Z2 Go GPU has no recorded slot width, no bus interface data, and no suggested PSU, reflecting its embedded or mobile-oriented nature. Its single USB Type-C display output contrasts with the W7500's four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of purpose. The Radeon PRO W7500 is a professional workstation card, evidenced by its 70 W TDP, single-slot design, four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, and PCIe 4.0 x8 connectivity. Its 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 190.4 GTexel/s texture rate are nearly three times the Z2 Go GPU's 4.147 TFLOPS and 129.6 GTexel/s. The W7500's 108.8 GPixel/s pixel rate exceeds the Z2 Go's 86.40 GPixel/s by 26 percent. For rendering, compute, or any workload that stresses raw throughput, the W7500 is the clear choice.

The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, with its 28 W TDP, 16 GB of LPDDR5, and 2700 MHz boost clock, appears designed for efficiency and integration rather than peak performance. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP16 throughput (2:1) is exactly half its FP32 figure, matching the W7500's 2:1 ratio of 24.37 TFLOPS FP16. The Z2 Go's 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is less than half the W7500's 256.0 GB/s, which will constrain memory-bound tasks. The Z2 Go's 50th percentile rank, despite having no benchmarks, suggests it sits at the median of the database based on its specifications alone.

The W7500's release date of August 2, 2023, and its 429 USD launch MSRP position it as a current-generation professional product. The Z2 Go GPU's release date of December 31, 2024, marks it as newer, but its lack of benchmark data means its real-world standing remains unverified. The W7500's nearest rivals, all within 0.5 percent of its average score, indicate that it competes in a tightly packed field where architectural efficiency, not raw score, determines suitability.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 (W7500) versus RDNA 2.0 (Z2 Go GPU)
• Chip: Navi 33 versus Rembrandt+
• Codename: Hotpink Bonefish versus none
• Generation: Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) versus Console GPU (AMD)
• Transistors: 13,300 million versus 13,100 million
• Die Size: 204 mm² versus 208 mm²
• Transistor Density: 65.2M / mm² versus 63.0M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1500 MHz versus 800 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1700 MHz versus 2700 MHz
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 8 GB versus 16 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus LPDDR5
• Memory Bandwidth: 256.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s
• Shading Units: 1792 versus 768
• TMUs: 112 versus 48
• ROPs: 64 versus 32
• RT Cores: 28 versus 12
• Pixel Rate: 108.8 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 190.4 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s
• FP32: 12.19 TFLOPS versus 4.147 TFLOPS
• FP16: 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 70 W versus 28 W
• Slot Width: Single-slot versus none
• Suggested PSU: 250 W versus none
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus none
• Display Outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 versus 1x USB Type-C
• Dimensions: 216 mm x 115 mm x 20 mm versus none
• Release Date: 2023-08-02 versus 2024-12-31
• Launch MSRP: 429 USD versus none
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega versus none
• Average Benchmark Score: 16415 versus 0
• Percentile: 59 versus 50
• Nearest Rivals: four listed versus none

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Radeon PRO W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.37 TFLOPS FP16, while the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.294 TFLOPS FP16. The W7500 is roughly three times faster in both metrics.

Q: How do memory capacities and bandwidth compare?

A: The Z2 Go GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5, double the W7500's 8 GB of GDDR6. However, the W7500's bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s is 2.5 times the Z2 Go's 102.4 GB/s, giving the W7500 a substantial advantage for data-heavy workloads.

Q: What do the benchmark scores show for the W7500?

A: The W7500 averages 16415 across all tests, with a Geekbench Vulkan score of 68634, a Passmark G3D score of 13368, and a Passmark GPU compute score of 5910. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, scores 16408, a 0 percent delta.

Q: Why does the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU have no benchmark scores?

A: The database records an average benchmark score of 0 and an empty benchmark list for the Z2 Go GPU. Its 50th percentile rank appears to be derived from its specifications rather than any measured performance.

Q: Are the two GPUs built on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both use a 6 nm process node at TSMC. The W7500 has a transistor density of 65.2M per mm², while the Z2 Go GPU has 63.0M per mm².

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The W7500 is rated at 70 W TDP, while the Z2 Go GPU is rated at 28 W TDP. The W7500 also lists a 250 W suggested PSU, whereas the Z2 Go GPU has no suggested PSU recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon PRO W7500 wins decisively in every recorded performance metric. Its FP32 throughput of 12.19 TFLOPS is 2.94 times the Z2 Go's 4.147 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 190.4 GTexel/s exceeds the Z2 Go's 129.6 GTexel/s by 47 percent. Its pixel rate of 108.8 GPixel/s beats the Z2 Go's 86.40 GPixel/s by 26 percent. Memory bandwidth favors the W7500 at 256.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, a 150 percent advantage. The W7500 also has more than double the shading units (1792 versus 768), TMUs (112 versus 48), ROPs (64 versus 32), and ray tracing cores (28 versus 12).

The Z2 Go GPU wins where efficiency and capacity matter. Its 28 W TDP is 60 percent lower than the W7500's 70 W, making it suitable for power-constrained environments. Its 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory doubles the W7500's 8 GB, which could benefit workloads that require large memory footprints but tolerate lower bandwidth. Its boost clock of 2700 MHz is 59 percent higher than the W7500's 1700 MHz, indicating headroom for burst performance when power allows. The Z2 Go's single USB Type-C output suggests a compact, integrated form factor, while the W7500's four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs target multi-display professional setups.

The W7500's 59th percentile versus the Z2 Go's 50th percentile, combined with the W7500's extensive benchmark record, confirms its position as the performance leader. The Z2 Go's lack of any measured scores means its wins are purely structural: lower power, higher capacity, and newer release date. For workloads that demand throughput, the W7500 is the only choice. For workloads that prioritize power efficiency or memory capacity over speed, the Z2 Go GPU offers a different trade-off. The 0 percent delta between the W7500 and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell in average score underscores how competitive the W7500 is within its own market segment, while the Z2 Go GPU remains an unproven quantity in the database.