AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a significant performance gap between these two AMD parts, though direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons are limited because the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Radeon PRO W7500 carries a full set of nine benchmark results, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has none, so the comparison relies on the W7500's absolute scores and architectural specifications.

Looking at the W7500's standalone results, its strongest showing is in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 68634, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 58213. In the Passmark suite, the G3D score reaches 13368, while GPU Compute lands at 5910. The DirectX legacy tests are lower: DirectX 9 scores 200, DirectX 11 scores 125, DirectX 10 scores 65, and DirectX 12 scores 46. The G2D score sits at 1174.

The W7500's average benchmark score is 16415, which places it at the 59th percentile among all GPUs tracked in the database. Its nearest rivals in the rankings are tightly clustered. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell averages 16408, a delta of 0 percent. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT averages 16361, putting it 0.3 percent behind the W7500. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M averages 16351, a 0.4 percent deficit. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 averages 16504, which is 0.5 percent ahead of the W7500. These margins are extremely narrow, indicating the W7500 sits in a competitive performance tier where single-digit percentage differences separate adjacent products.

Because the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no benchmark entries, its percentile ranking of 50 reflects the default position for unmeasured parts rather than an observed performance level. The data cannot confirm whether the Z2 GPU outperforms or underperforms the W7500 in any specific workload. What the specifications do show is a substantial difference in raw compute resources: the W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32, while the Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS FP32. That is a 47 percent advantage for the W7500 in theoretical single-precision throughput. The W7500 also has 1792 shading units versus 768, 112 texture mapping units versus 48, and 64 render output units versus 32. These are large structural gaps that would likely translate into meaningful performance differences in most rendering and compute scenarios, but without Z2 GPU benchmark data, the database cannot quantify that gap empirically.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 for the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU. The W7500 leads by roughly 47 percent in theoretical single-precision throughput.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The W7500 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X, also on a 128-bit bus, but with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Z2 GPU has double the capacity but less than half the bandwidth.

Q: What process nodes are these GPUs built on?

A: The W7500 uses a 6 nm TSMC process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The Z2 GPU uses a 4 nm TSMC process with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Z2 GPU achieves a transistor density of 142.6M per mm², versus 65.2M per mm² for the W7500.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature sets are identical in the recorded data.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The W7500 has a TDP of 70 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Z2 GPU has a TDP of 28 W and no suggested PSU listed. Neither uses external power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The W7500 has 28 ray tracing cores, while the Z2 GPU has 12. The W7500 also has a higher pixel rate at 108.8 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate at 190.4 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 3.0 architecture, but they are implemented on different chips with different design priorities. The W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish," belonging to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Z2 GPU uses the Hawk Point chip, categorized under Console GPU (AMD) generation. Despite the architectural family name being identical, the physical implementations diverge substantially.

The process node is a major differentiator. The W7500 is fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process, while the Z2 GPU uses a 4 nm TSMC process. The Z2 GPU packs 25,390 million transistors onto a 178 mm² die, yielding a density of 142.6M per mm². The W7500 contains 13,300 million transistors on a larger 204 mm² die, with a density of 65.2M per mm². The Z2 GPU's die is smaller and denser, reflecting a more advanced manufacturing node.

Compute resources differ sharply. The W7500 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Z2 GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Ray tracing core counts are 28 versus 12. The W7500's FP16 throughput is 24.37 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the Z2 GPU's FP16 is 8.294 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. This means the W7500 has dedicated FP16 acceleration that doubles its throughput, whereas the Z2 GPU runs FP16 at the same rate as FP32.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The W7500 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 2000 MHz memory clock (16 Gbps effective) and achieves 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Z2 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5X at 937 MHz (7.5 Gbps effective) with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. The W7500's memory clock is more than double the Z2 GPU's, and its bandwidth advantage is roughly 2.1 times. The Z2 GPU compensates with double the capacity, which may benefit workloads that require large working sets but do not demand high bandwidth.

Clock behavior differs as well. The W7500 has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1700 MHz. The Z2 GPU has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The Z2 GPU's boost clock is significantly higher, reaching 2700 MHz versus 1700 MHz, but its base clock is much lower. The W7500's narrower clock range suggests a more stable operating profile, while the Z2 GPU relies on aggressive boosting to reach its performance targets.

The power envelope tells a clear story. The W7500 has a TDP of 70 W and is a single-slot card with no power connectors, requiring a 250 W PSU. The Z2 GPU has a TDP of 28 W, also with no power connectors, and no suggested PSU listed. The Z2 GPU consumes less than half the power of the W7500, which aligns with its console-oriented design goals.

Physical and connectivity details also diverge. The W7500 is a 216 mm long, 115 mm high, 20 mm wide card with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Z2 GPU has no listed dimensions, no bus interface, and a single USB Type-C display output. The W7500 is clearly designed as a workstation card with multiple display outputs and a standard PCIe slot, while the Z2 GPU appears intended for an embedded or console form factor with minimal external connectivity.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of roles. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is the higher-performance part across every measured or specified compute metric. It leads in FP32 throughput (12.19 TFLOPS versus 8.294 TFLOPS), shading units (1792 versus 768), TMUs (112 versus 48), ROPs (64 versus 32), ray tracing 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), and memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s versus 119.9 GB/s). Its average benchmark score of 16415 places it at the 59th percentile, with rivals within 0.5 percent, confirming it sits in a competitive mid-range tier.

The Z2 GPU, by contrast, offers advantages in memory capacity (16 GB versus 8 GB), transistor density (142.6M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm²), a more advanced 4 nm process node, a higher boost clock (2700 MHz versus 1700 MHz), and dramatically lower power consumption (28 W versus 70 W). It also has a higher transistor count (25,390 million versus 13,300 million) on a smaller die (178 mm² versus 204 mm²). These traits point toward an integrated or low-power console application where capacity and efficiency matter more than raw throughput.

For users who need maximum compute performance, multiple display outputs, and a dedicated workstation card, the W7500 is the only choice between these two. The data shows it has more of every compute resource that matters for rendering and GPGPU workloads. The Z2 GPU, with its single USB Type-C output, no PCIe interface listing, and no benchmark scores, is not positioned as a general-purpose desktop GPU. Its 16 GB LPDDR5X memory and 28 W TDP suggest a design focused on power-constrained environments where the W7500's 70 W requirement would be prohibitive.

The W7500's launch MSRP is 429 USD. No pricing information exists for the Z2 GPU in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7500 | AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU |

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

| Chip | Navi 33 | Hawk Point |

| Codename | Hotpink Bonefish | None listed |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) | Console GPU (AMD) |

| Process node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 25,390 million |

| Die size | 204 mm² | 178 mm² |

| Transistor density | 65.2M / mm² | 142.6M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1500 MHz | 800 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1700 MHz | 2700 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 937 MHz, 7.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 119.9 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1792 | 768 |

| TMUs | 112 | 48 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray tracing cores | 28 | 12 |

| Pixel rate | 108.8 GPixel/s | 86.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 190.4 GTexel/s | 129.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 12.19 TFLOPS | 8.294 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) | 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 70 W | 28 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | None listed |

| Power connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | None listed |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | None listed |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x USB Type-C |

| Dimensions | 216 mm x 115 mm x 20 mm | None listed |

| Release date | 2023-08-02 | 2024-12-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | None listed |

| Launch MSRP | 429 USD | None listed |

| Average benchmark score | 16415 | 0 |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 59 | 50 |