AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has nine recorded benchmark scores across Geekbench and Passmark suites, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM has no recorded benchmark scores at all. This makes a direct numerical comparison impossible for compute, graphics, or API-specific workloads.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 posts an average benchmark score of 16415 across its suite. Its percentile ranking sits at 59, meaning it outperforms 59 percent of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA N1 16SM holds a percentile ranking of 50, but with an average benchmark score of 0, this ranking reflects its status as an integrated graphics processor with no tested workloads rather than actual performance headroom.

Within the AMD card's nearest rival group, the closest comparable scores are the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at 16408 with a 0 percent delta, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT at 16361 with a 0.3 percent delta, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M at 16351 with a 0.4 percent delta. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 sits at 16504, which is 0.5 percent ahead of the W7500. This places the W7500 in a tightly clustered performance band where no single rival holds a decisive edge.

Looking at individual workloads for the W7500, the Geekbench Vulkan score of 68634 is substantially higher than the OpenCL score of 58213, a gap of roughly 18 percent that reflects architectural strengths in the Vulkan API path. Passmark results show a different pattern: DirectX 9 scores 200, DirectX 11 scores 125, DirectX 10 scores 65, and DirectX 12 scores 46. The Passmark G3D score of 13368 dwarfs the GPU compute score of 5910, indicating that rasterization-heavy workloads perform significantly better than compute-oriented tasks on this architecture. The G2D score of 1174 is comparatively low, which aligns with a workstation card that prioritizes 3D throughput over 2D desktop acceleration.

The lack of benchmark data for the NVIDIA N1 16SM means its performance characteristics must be inferred from architectural specifications alone, which the database records in detail but cannot confirm through measured results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families and serve different market positions. AMD uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, part of the Radeon Pro Navi generation. NVIDIA uses Blackwell 2.0 with the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP generation. The manufacturing process differs: AMD uses TSMC's 6 nm node, while NVIDIA uses TSMC's 5 nm node. The AMD chip contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA die is larger at 382 mm², but its transistor count is listed as unknown, so density cannot be calculated.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor, as indicated by its slot width of IGP. The AMD card is a discrete single-slot solution. This fundamental form factor difference shapes every other specification. The NVIDIA part draws power without external connectors and has no TDP recorded. The AMD card has a 70 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested power supply of 250 W. The NVIDIA part uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The AMD card uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The NVIDIA part has 16 times the memory capacity and slightly higher bandwidth despite a lower effective memory clock: 8.5 Gbps effective versus 16 Gbps effective for AMD. This reflects the different roles, a workstation card with dedicated VRAM versus an integrated processor that shares system memory.

Compute resources also differ. The NVIDIA part has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA leads in shader and texture counts but trails heavily in ROPs. Ray tracing hardware shows 28 RT cores on AMD versus 16 on NVIDIA. Tensor cores appear only on NVIDIA, with 64 units; AMD lists none. Clock behavior differs as well: AMD has a base clock of 1500 MHz and boost of 1700 MHz, while NVIDIA has a lower base of 741 MHz but a much higher boost of 2346 MHz.

Rasterization rates tell a clear story. AMD produces 108.8 GPixel/s against NVIDIA's 56.30 GPixel/s, a near 2-to-1 advantage. Texture rate inverts this: NVIDIA produces 300.3 GTexel/s against AMD's 190.4 GTexel/s. Floating point performance favors AMD: 12.19 TFLOPS FP32 versus 9.609 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 shows a bigger split: AMD reaches 24.37 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while NVIDIA stays at 9.609 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

API support separates the two completely. AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. Display outputs differ as well: AMD provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while NVIDIA provides a single HDMI port.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear split by workload type. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is a measured performer with nine validated benchmark scores, a 59th percentile ranking, and an average score of 16415. It competes within 0.5 percent of four named rivals, which indicates consistent, predictable performance for its class. Its 70 W TDP, single-slot design, and absence of power connectors make it suitable for compact workstation builds where thermal and space constraints apply.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no measured benchmarks and no average score. Its 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder, not a performance result. However, its specifications indicate a different purpose: 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, 64 tensor cores, and an IGP form factor point toward unified memory and AI-oriented workloads rather than traditional GPU rasterization. Its 9.609 TFLOPS FP32 is lower than the AMD card, and its 1:1 FP16 ratio halves its FP16 throughput relative to AMD's 2:1 ratio.

Users who need validated DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan performance should select the AMD card, since the NVIDIA part lists all three APIs as unavailable. Users who need large unified memory capacity or tensor core acceleration have only one option between the two, the NVIDIA N1 16SM, because the AMD card lacks tensor cores entirely. The AMD card's 108.8 GPixel/s pixel rate also makes it the stronger choice for traditional display output workloads, while the NVIDIA part's 300.3 GTexel/s texture rate gives it an advantage in texture-heavy processing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has an average benchmark score of 16415. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has an average benchmark score of 0 because no benchmarks are recorded for it.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS FP32, which is lower.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 uses a 6 nm process from TSMC. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses a 5 nm process from TSMC.

Q: Does either GPU have tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 64 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 lists no tensor cores.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 wins in measured compute and graphics workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 58213 and Vulkan score of 68634 provide validated reference points. Its Passmark G3D score of 13368 and GPU compute score of 5910 give it a measurable edge in rasterization and compute tasks. Its pixel rate of 108.8 GPixel/s is roughly double the NVIDIA part, which matters for display-heavy workstation tasks. Its FP32 output of 12.19 TFLOPS exceeds the NVIDIA part by about 27 percent. Its FP16 output of 24.37 TFLOPS is more than double the NVIDIA part's 9.609 TFLOPS. The AMD card also supports four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, which suits multi-monitor setups.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins in memory capacity, texture throughput, and AI-related specifications. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory is 16 times the AMD card's 8 GB. Its bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s is about 7 percent higher. Its texture rate of 300.3 GTexel/s is about 58 percent higher than the AMD card's 190.4 GTexel/s. Its 64 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware that the AMD card does not offer. Its 2048 shading units and 128 TMUs exceed the AMD card's 1792 and 112 respectively. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bus bandwidth of the AMD card's PCIe 4.0 x8 connection.

The AMD card also wins on physical integration for discrete workstation builds: it is a single-slot card with 216 mm length, 115 mm height, and 20 mm width, and it requires no power connectors. The NVIDIA part is an IGP, which means it integrates into a system board rather than a slot, and its dimensions are not recorded.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification category.

Process and Die: AMD uses 6 nm TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die and a density of 65.2M per mm². NVIDIA uses 5 nm TSMC with unknown transistor count on a 382 mm² die and no recorded density.

Memory: AMD has 8 GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus, 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 16 Gbps effective memory clock. NVIDIA has 128 GB LPDDR5X, 256-bit bus, 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, and 8.5 Gbps effective memory clock.

Compute Units: AMD has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores. NVIDIA has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores.

Clocks: AMD runs at 1500 MHz base and 1700 MHz boost. NVIDIA runs at 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost.

Performance Rates: AMD delivers 108.8 GPixel/s, 190.4 GTexel/s, 12.19 TFLOPS FP32, and 24.37 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). NVIDIA delivers 56.30 GPixel/s, 300.3 GTexel/s, 9.609 TFLOPS FP32, and 9.609 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Power and Form Factor: AMD has a 70 W TDP, single-slot width, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. NVIDIA has unknown TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU.

Interface and Outputs: AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and 4x DisplayPort 2.1. NVIDIA uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and 1x HDMI.

API Support: AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists all three as N/A.

Release and Status: AMD released on 2023-08-02 with a launch MSRP of 429 USD and remains Active. NVIDIA releases on 2026-05-31, has no launch MSRP, and is listed as Active.