AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs AMD Radeon PRO W7800 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear picture: the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins both recorded tests by a substantial margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the W7800 scores 154366 against the W7600's 81528, a delta of 89.3%. The Vulkan test shows the same pattern, with the W7800 at 175422 and the W7600 at 92688, again a delta of 89.3%. Both victories are decisive, and the consistency across the two APIs suggests the performance gap is not workload-specific but rather a fundamental difference in compute capability.

The average benchmark score reinforces this divide. The W7800 sits at 164894, while the W7600 averages 87108. That is nearly double the compute throughput in aggregate terms. The W7800 also ranks at the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the W7600 ranks at the 93rd percentile. While both are high performers, the three-percentile gap translates into a large raw score difference at this level of the market.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret these numbers. The W7800's average score of 164894 places it just 0.2% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 (165217), 0.7% behind the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166094), and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (162504). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X by 2.2% (168574). This is a card that sits in a tight competitive cluster, trading places with high-end workstation accelerators. The W7600, by contrast, sits at 87108, which is 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87445), 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85637), 4.4% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91134), and 5% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91671). The W7600 is clearly a different performance tier, competing with mid-range mobile and desktop workstation parts.

The delta between the two AMD cards is far larger than the deltas within their respective rival groups. The W7800 beats the W7600 by 89.3% in both tests, while its closest rival gap is only 2.2%. This means the W7800 is not just a slightly faster version of the W7600; it is a fundamentally different class of product. The data suggests that any workload that scales with raw compute throughput will see nearly double the performance on the W7800.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the superior performer in every measured test. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a higher average benchmark score, and ranks higher in the all-GPU percentile ranking. The 89.3% lead in both OpenCL and Vulkan means that software leveraging these APIs should see close to double the throughput on the W7800 relative to the W7600.

The W7600, however, is not without merit. It remains an Active production card with a 93rd percentile rank, and its average score of 87108 places it within 5% of the NVIDIA RTX A4500 and 4.4% of the RTX A4500 Mobile. For users whose workloads fit within the W7600's capabilities, the recorded data shows a competent workstation GPU that is not far off established mid-range rivals.

For users deciding between these two cards, the choice hinges on whether the near-double compute performance of the W7800 is necessary. The W7800's 97th percentile ranking and its position within 2.2% of the Radeon Pro W6900X and 0.7% of the RTX 4500 Ada Generation places it in a high-end bracket. The W7600's 93rd percentile and its position near the Quadro GP100 and RTX A4500 places it in the mid-range. The benchmarks do not show any test where the W7600 closes the gap. The verdict is that the W7800 is the pick for maximum compute performance, while the W7600 is the pick for a lower-power, single-slot workstation card with respectable scores.

Architecture Differences

The two cards share the same RDNA 3.0 architecture and belong to the same Radeon Pro Navi generation, but they are built on different silicon. The W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip with the codename Plum Bonito, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip with the codename Hotpink Bonefish, fabricated on a 6 nm process at the same foundry. The process difference is notable, with the W7800 using the more advanced node.

The transistor counts reflect the scale difference. The W7800 packs 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a density of 109.1 million transistors per mm². The W7600 has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a density of 65.2 million per mm². That is a 4.3x difference in transistor count and a 2.6x difference in die area, which explains the substantial performance gap.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The W7800 has 4480 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 128 render output units, and 70 ray tracing cores. The W7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. Every one of these counts is exactly double or close to double on the W7800, consistent with the near-double benchmark scores.

Clock speeds are closer than the compute resource counts. The W7800 has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost clock of 2525 MHz, while the W7600 has a base of 1720 MHz and a boost of 2440 MHz. The W7800 runs slightly higher, but the dominant factor in the performance delta is the doubled compute units, not the modest clock advantage.

Memory architectures differ significantly. The W7800 offers 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W7600 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is identical at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, so the bandwidth difference comes entirely from the wider bus. The W7800 has four times the memory capacity and double the bandwidth.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has tensor cores listed. The display outputs differ: the W7800 has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, while the W7600 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 than the W7600 in OpenCL?

A: The W7800 scores 154366 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the W7600 scores 81528, giving the W7800 an 89.3% advantage.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The W7800 has an average benchmark score of 164894, while the W7600 averages 87108. The W7800 ranks at the 97th percentile of all GPUs, and the W7600 ranks at the 93rd percentile.

Q: How does the W7600 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The W7600's average score of 87108 is 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87445), 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85637), 4.4% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91134), and 5% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91671).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The W7800 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 2250 MHz memory clock with 18 Gbps effective.

Q: Are the two cards on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The W7800 uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the W7600 uses a 6 nm process at TSMC. The W7800's chip is the Navi 31 with 57,700 million transistors, and the W7600's chip is the Navi 33 with 13,300 million transistors.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card lists tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins every recorded benchmark, so its advantages are clear. In Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, it leads by 89.3% in both. This makes it the choice for workloads that are heavily compute-bound, where raw shader throughput, texture rate, and pixel rate matter. The W7800's FP32 performance is 45.25 TFLOPS against the W7600's 19.99 TFLOPS. Its texture rate is 707.0 GTexel/s against 312.3 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate is 323.2 GPixel/s against 156.2 GPixel/s. The W7800 also has 70 ray tracing cores versus 32, which suggests better ray tracing workloads, though no ray tracing benchmark is included in the recorded data.

The W7800's 32 GB memory capacity and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the stronger candidate for large datasets that exceed the W7600's 8 GB capacity. The fourfold memory capacity advantage is not reflected in the two compute benchmarks, but it is a critical differentiator for memory-bound professional workloads.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins in the dimensions of power and physical footprint. Its TDP is 130 W versus the W7800's 260 W, and it requires a single 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, versus the W7800's dual 8-pin connectors and 600 W suggested PSU. The W7600 is a single-slot card, whereas the W7800 is dual-slot. The W7600 is also shorter at 241 mm versus 280 mm. For users with limited space or power budgets, the W7600 offers a viable path, though the recorded benchmark data does not show any compute test where it approaches the W7800's performance.

The W7600 also has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the W7800 has three DisplayPort 2.1 and one mini-DisplayPort 2.1. That extra full-size output could matter in multi-display setups.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in almost every major specification. The process node is 5 nm for the W7800 and 6 nm for the W7600. The W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip with 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, while the W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. Transistor density is 109.1M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm².

Base clocks are 1895 MHz for the W7800 and 1720 MHz for the W7600. Boost clocks are 2525 MHz and 2440 MHz, respectively. Memory clocks are identical at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity is 32 GB for the W7800 and 8 GB for the W7600. Bus width is 256 bit versus 128 bit. Bandwidth is 576.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 4480 versus 2048. TMUs are 280 versus 128. ROPs are 128 versus 64. Ray tracing cores are 70 versus 32.

Pixel rate is 323.2 GPixel/s versus 156.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 707.0 GTexel/s versus 312.3 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 45.25 TFLOPS versus 19.99 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 90.50 TFLOPS versus 39.98 TFLOPS, both at 2:1 ratio.

TDP is 260 W versus 130 W. Slot width is dual-slot versus single-slot. Power connectors are 2x 8-pin versus 1x 6-pin. Suggested PSU is 600 W versus 300 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8.

Dimensions are 280 mm by 110 mm by 40 mm for the W7800, versus 241 mm by 115 mm with no recorded width for the W7600. Display outputs are 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for the W7800, and 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for the W7600.

Both cards are Active in production, use GDDR6 memory, and share the same RDNA 3.0 architecture, same DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan versions, and the same predecessor in the Radeon Pro Vega. The W7800 launched on 2023-04-12 with a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD. The W7600 launched on 2023-08-02 with a launch MSRP of 599 USD.