AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a full benchmark profile for the AMD Radeon PRO W7500, while the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 has no recorded benchmark entries. This makes a direct score-to-score comparison impossible. Instead, the analysis must rely on the W7500's measured results and the architectural specifications recorded for both accelerators.

The W7500 records an average benchmark score of 16415 across all tests, placing it at the 59th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 58213, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 68634. In PassMark testing, the W7500 delivers 13368 in G3D, 5910 in GPU compute, 1174 in G2D, 200 in DirectX 9, 125 in DirectX 11, 65 in DirectX 10, and 46 in DirectX 12.

The H20 NVL16, by contrast, has zero benchmarks recorded and an average score of 0. Its percentile rank is 50, which reflects no measured data rather than a performance level. The absence of results means the H20 NVL16 cannot be positioned against the W7500 or any other GPU in the database using recorded scores.

The nearest rivals for the W7500 provide context. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell shows an average score of 16408, a delta of 0% against the W7500. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16361, 0.3% behind. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16351, 0.4% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 scores 16504, 0.5% ahead. These deltas indicate the W7500 sits in a tight cluster where the top four neighbors are within 0.9 percentage points of each other.

The H20 NVL16 has no nearest rivals listed, reinforcing that it occupies a separate category in the database, one defined by specifications rather than measured outcomes. The data shows the W7500 is a measured, mid-pack performer, while the H20 NVL16 is an unmeasured server accelerator.

Where Each One Wins

For the AMD Radeon PRO W7500, the recorded wins are in benchmark availability and measured performance diversity. The data shows nine distinct benchmark results spanning OpenCL, Vulkan, and multiple DirectX versions, plus 2D and 3D workloads. The W7500's strongest recorded result is its Vulkan score of 68634, which exceeds its OpenCL score of 58213 by roughly 18%. Its PassMark G3D score of 13368 is much higher than its DirectX 12 score of 46, indicating the card performs better in older or broader graphics workloads than in the newest DirectX 12 path.

The W7500 also wins on power efficiency in the recorded specifications. It draws 70 W with a suggested PSU of 250 W, uses no external power connectors, and fits in a single slot. This makes it suitable for workstations where power delivery and physical space are constrained.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 wins on raw specification scale. It records 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus, yielding 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth. The W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s. The H20 NVL16's memory bandwidth is roughly 15.7 times higher. The H20 NVL16 also records 9984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, and 312 tensor cores. The W7500 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The H20 NVL16's FP32 throughput is 39.54 TFLOPS versus 12.19 TFLOPS for the W7500, a 3.2 times advantage. Its FP16 throughput is 79.07 TFLOPS versus 24.37 TFLOPS, also a 3.2 times margin.

The H20 NVL16 wins on interconnect and bandwidth. It uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the W7500 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The H20 NVL16 is an SXM module with no display outputs, while the W7500 is a single-slot card with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The H20 NVL16 has a higher base clock of 1830 MHz and boost clock of 1980 MHz, versus 1500 MHz and 1700 MHz for the W7500.

FAQ

Q: Does the NVIDIA H20 NVL16 have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists zero benchmarks for the H20 NVL16, with an average benchmark score of 0. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has nine recorded benchmark results.

Q: How does the W7500 compare to its closest rivals in average score?

A: The W7500's average benchmark score is 16415. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell scores 16408 with a 0% delta, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16361 with a 0.3% delta, the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16351 with a 0.4% delta, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 scores 16504 with a -0.5% delta.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The H20 NVL16 records 39.54 TFLOPS FP32, while the W7500 records 12.19 TFLOPS. The H20 NVL16 is 3.2 times higher.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The W7500 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The H20 NVL16 has no display outputs and is an SXM module.

Q: What are the power requirements recorded for each card?

A: The W7500 has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W and a suggested PSU of 800 W.

Specification Differences

The two accelerators differ on every major specification field. The W7500 uses a 6 nm process node, while the H20 NVL16 uses 5 nm. Transistor counts differ substantially: the W7500 has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, while the H20 NVL16 has 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die. Transistor density is 65.2M per mm² for the W7500 and 98.3M per mm² for the H20 NVL16.

Clock speeds differ. The W7500 runs at 1500 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz or 16 Gbps effective. The H20 NVL16 runs at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost, with memory at 1313 MHz or 5.3 Gbps effective. Memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all differ: 8 GB GDDR6 on 128-bit at 256.0 GB/s versus 96 GB HBM3 on 6144-bit at 4.03 TB/s.

Compute units differ. The W7500 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The H20 NVL16 has 9984 shading units, 312 TMUs, 24 ROPs, no ray tracing cores, and 312 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 108.8 GPixel/s for the W7500 versus 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20 NVL16. Texture rate is 190.4 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 12.19 TFLOPS versus 39.54 TFLOPS. FP16 is 24.37 TFLOPS versus 79.07 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specifications differ. The W7500 has a TDP of 70 W, is single-slot, uses no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The H20 NVL16 has a TDP of 400 W, is an SXM module, and suggests an 800 W PSU. The W7500 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The H20 NVL16 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs. The W7500 measures 216 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded dimensions.

Release dates differ: the W7500 was released on 2023-08-02, while the H20 NVL16 was released on 2025-09-01. The W7500 has a launch MSRP of 429 USD. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded launch MSRP. The W7500 lists Radeon Pro Vega as its predecessor. The H20 NVL16 lists Server Ada as its predecessor and Server Blackwell as its successor.

Architecture Differences

The W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip under the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. Its generation is recorded as Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). The H20 NVL16 uses the GH100 chip under the Hopper architecture, with no codename recorded, and its generation is Server Hopper (Hxx).

The API support differs completely. The W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H20 NVL16 records N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not designed for graphics API workloads. This aligns with the H20 NVL16 having no display outputs and being an SXM module, while the W7500 has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

The W7500 includes 28 ray tracing cores, while the H20 NVL16 has none recorded. Conversely, the H20 NVL16 includes 312 tensor cores, while the W7500 has none recorded. This split shows the W7500 is built for graphics rendering with ray tracing, while the H20 NVL16 is built for compute workloads with tensor operations.

The process node difference is 6 nm for the W7500 versus 5 nm for the H20 NVL16, both from TSMC. The transistor density difference, 65.2M per mm² versus 98.3M per mm², reflects the newer node and larger chip design of the H20 NVL16.

The memory architecture differs fundamentally. The W7500 uses GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 uses HBM3 with a 6144-bit bus and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth. The H20 NVL16's memory is 12 times larger and its bandwidth is approximately 15.7 times higher. The H20 NVL16 also has a lower pixel rate, 47.52 GPixel/s versus 108.8 GPixel/s, because its ROP count is only 24 versus 64 for the W7500.

The Verdict

The data shows two accelerators built for different purposes with no overlapping benchmark results. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is a measured graphics card with nine recorded benchmarks, a 59th percentile rank, and an average score of 16415. It delivers 108.8 GPixel/s pixel rate, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, includes ray tracing cores, and provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. Its 70 W TDP and single-slot design make it a low-power workstation card. Its launch MSRP is 429 USD.

The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 is an unmeasured server accelerator with no benchmarks, no graphics API support, and no display outputs. It records 39.54 TFLOPS FP32, 79.07 TFLOPS FP16, 312 tensor cores, and 4.03 TB/s memory bandwidth. Its 400 W TDP and SXM module form factor indicate a data center compute role. It has no launch MSRP recorded.

Who should pick which depends on the workload. The W7500 suits graphics rendering, workstation display output, and DirectX or Vulkan workloads, based on its recorded API support, ray tracing cores, and display outputs. The H20 NVL16 suits compute-heavy tasks requiring tensor cores, large HBM3 memory, and high bandwidth, based on its specifications. The W7500 has measured data to support its capabilities. The H20 NVL16 has no measured data, so its performance must be inferred from its specifications alone. The database positions the W7500 among mid-range GPUs with close rival scores, while the H20 NVL16 stands alone without rivals or benchmarks.