AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 and AMD Radeon PRO W7500 represent two distinct approaches to workstation graphics, separated by nearly five years of architectural evolution. The data shows the Quadro RTX 4000, built on Turing, wins 8 of 9 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Radeon PRO W7500, built on RDNA 3.0, takes a single but significant victory in 2D workloads. The average benchmark scores tell a similar story: the Quadro RTX 4000 posts 17,789 against the W7500’s 16,415, a 8.4% gap that places the NVIDIA card in the 61st percentile of all GPUs versus the AMD card’s 59th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro RTX 4000 dominates in compute and modern graphics APIs. Its largest margin comes in Passmark DirectX 10, where it scores 108 versus 65, a 66.2% advantage. This is followed by a 28% lead in Geekbench OpenCL (74,540 vs 58,213) and a 14.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan (78,844 vs 68,634). The pattern suggests the NVIDIA card’s 2304 shading units and 288 tensor cores provide a substantial throughput advantage in parallel workloads, despite the AMD card’s higher FP32 rating of 12.19 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS. In DirectX 11, the gap narrows to just 2.4% (128 vs 125), and in DirectX 9 it is 2.5% (205 vs 200), indicating that legacy API performance is nearly identical.

The Radeon PRO W7500’s sole victory comes in Passmark G2D, where it scores 1174 against 846, a 27.9% improvement. This 2D performance win aligns with its higher pixel rate of 108.8 GPixel/s versus 98.88 GPixel/s, and it suggests the AMD card handles desktop compositing, window management, and 2D acceleration tasks more efficiently. The W7500 also holds a narrower defeat in Passmark GPU Compute, losing 5910 to 6176, a margin of only 4.5%. In DirectX 12, the Quadro RTX 4000 wins by 13% (52 vs 46), but both scores are low in absolute terms, indicating this generation of workstation cards is not optimized for the latest gaming-oriented DX12 feature sets.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 for users whose primary workloads involve 3D rendering, GPU compute, or Vulkan-based applications. Its 28% lead in OpenCL and 14.9% lead in Vulkan make it the stronger choice for scientific simulation, ray tracing, and cross-platform graphics development. The 13.1% advantage in Passmark G3D (15,117 vs 13,368) reinforces this, showing better overall 3D rasterization performance. For those running legacy DirectX 9 or 10 applications, the Quadro RTX 4000’s 66.2% lead in DX10 is decisive.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is the better pick for users who prioritize 2D-heavy workflows, such as multi-monitor desktop environments, CAD drafting with minimal 3D previews, or software that relies heavily on GDI acceleration. Its 27.9% advantage in G2D is substantial, and its lower power draw of 70 W versus 160 W makes it a more efficient option for compact or passively cooled systems. The W7500 also offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs versus the Quadro’s three DisplayPort 1.4a and one USB Type-C, which matters for high-resolution multi-display setups. However, for any task that stresses the GPU’s compute or 3D engines, the Quadro RTX 4000 remains ahead by margins ranging from 4.5% to 66.2%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result is Passmark DirectX 10, where the Quadro RTX 4000 scores 108 against the W7500’s 65. This 66.2% delta is nearly five times larger than the next biggest gap, suggesting that Turing’s architecture handles DX10-era shader workloads with far greater efficiency than RDNA 3.0. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro’s 74,540 versus 58,213 represents a 28% advantage, a margin that reflects the NVIDIA card’s higher texture rate of 222.5 GTexel/s versus 190.4 GTexel/s, despite the AMD card having a higher FP32 throughput.

Geekbench Vulkan shows a 14.9% lead for NVIDIA (78,844 vs 68,634), which is notable because Vulkan is a modern low-level API that should favor the newer RDNA 3.0 architecture. The Quadro RTX 4000’s 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores likely contribute here, as Vulkan compute workloads can leverage these specialized units. Passmark G3D follows the same trend, with NVIDIA winning 15,117 to 13,368, a 13.1% margin that aligns with the card’s higher average benchmark score.

The closest contests are in DirectX 11 and DirectX 9. In DX11, the Quadro RTX 4000 wins 128 to 125, a 2.4% margin that is nearly within noise. In DX9, it wins 205 to 200, a 2.5% edge. These results suggest that for older games or legacy CAD applications, either card performs comparably. Passmark GPU Compute is the second-closest result, with NVIDIA winning 6176 to 5910, a 4.5% margin that is smaller than the OpenCL gap, indicating that AMD’s compute shaders are competitive in some workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has an average benchmark score of 17,789, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has 16,415, giving NVIDIA an 8.4% advantage.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro RTX 4000 in DirectX 10?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 scores 108 in Passmark DirectX 10 versus the W7500’s 65, a 66.2% lead.

Q: Does the Radeon PRO W7500 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins Passmark G2D with a score of 1174 versus 846, a 27.9% advantage for the AMD card.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has a TDP of 160 W, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has a TDP of 70 W, making the AMD card more power-efficient.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has 2304 shading units, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 has 1792.

Q: How do the cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has 416.0 GB/s bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, while the W7500 has 256.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 uses the TU104 chip on TSMC’s 12 nm process, packing 13,600 million transistors into a 545 mm² die. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip on TSMC’s 6 nm process, with 13,300 million transistors in a 204 mm² die. This means the AMD card achieves a transistor density of 65.2M per mm² versus NVIDIA’s 25.0M per mm², reflecting the newer manufacturing technology.

The NVIDIA card features 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, alongside 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores. The AMD card has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 28 RT cores and no tensor cores. The lack of tensor cores on the AMD side is a key architectural difference, as NVIDIA’s tensor cores are designed for AI and deep learning workloads. The Quadro RTX 4000 also has a higher texture rate of 222.5 GTexel/s, while the W7500 has a higher pixel rate of 108.8 GPixel/s.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which offers similar bandwidth but on a newer standard. The AMD card draws its power from the PCIe slot with no external connectors, while the NVIDIA card requires a single 8-pin connector.

Specification Differences

The most striking difference is in memory: both have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 uses a 256-bit bus for 416.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 uses a 128-bit bus for 256.0 GB/s. This gives NVIDIA a 62.5% bandwidth advantage, which directly impacts texture-heavy and large-dataset workloads.

Clock speeds favor AMD: the W7500 has a base clock of 1500 MHz and boost of 1700 MHz, versus NVIDIA’s 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. However, NVIDIA’s higher shading unit count and bandwidth compensate. FP32 performance is 12.19 TFLOPS for AMD versus 7.119 TFLOPS for NVIDIA, while FP16 is 24.37 TFLOPS for AMD versus 14.24 TFLOPS for NVIDIA (both at 2:1 ratio).

Physical specifications differ: the NVIDIA card is 241 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the AMD card is 216 mm long, 115 mm tall, and 20 mm wide. Both are single-slot. Display outputs differ significantly: AMD offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while NVIDIA offers 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. The AMD card has no power connectors and requires a 250 W PSU, while the NVIDIA card needs a 1x 8-pin connector and a 450 W PSU.

The production status also differs: the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is end-of-life, released on 2018-11-12, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is active, released on 2023-08-02. The NVIDIA card’s launch MSRP is 899 USD, while the AMD card’s is 429 USD.