AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark recorded for both cards is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE scores 109309 points, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 scores 81528 points. That puts the RX 9070 GRE 25.4% ahead, a substantial margin that reflects the generational gap between the two architectures. In raw compute terms, the RX 9070 GRE delivers 34.28 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput against 19.99 TFLOPS for the PRO W7600, a 71.4% advantage in theoretical peak performance.

The PRO W7600 does hold one measurable edge: its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 87108, which is higher than the RX 9070 GRE's average of 57367. This is because the PRO W7600 has two recorded benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), while the RX 9070 GRE has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result and a Geekbench OpenCL result. The 3DMark result of 5424 drags the RX 9070 GRE's average down considerably, even though its Geekbench OpenCL score is clearly superior. The PRO W7600's Geekbench Vulkan score of 92688 reinforces its compute strength, but the RX 9070 GRE's OpenCL result remains the outlier in raw performance.

In terms of percentile ranking, the PRO W7600 sits at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 9070 GRE sits at the 87th percentile. This seems counterintuitive given the RX 9070 GRE's higher OpenCL score, but the percentile is based on the average benchmark score, which includes the RX 9070 GRE's weaker 3DMark result. The PRO W7600's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87445, 0.4% higher), the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85637, 1.7% lower), the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91134, 4.4% higher), and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91671, 5.0% higher). The RX 9070 GRE's nearest rivals are the Intel Arc A580 (57756, 0.7% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (58085, 1.2% lower), the Intel Arc A570M (58239, 1.5% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58392, 1.8% lower). These rival scores show that the RX 9070 GRE's average is clustered tightly with older mainstream cards, while the PRO W7600's average competes with professional workstation GPUs.

The head-to-head table shows only one test, and the winner is the RX 9070 GRE. The 25.4% delta is the single most important number for anyone choosing between these two cards based on compute workloads. The PRO W7600's Vulkan score of 92688 is not directly compared, but it indicates that the card is competitive in that API, which may matter for specific applications that favor Vulkan over OpenCL.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations. The PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip based on RDNA 3.0, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The RX 9070 GRE uses the Navi 48 chip based on RDNA 4.0, with the codename Navi IV (RX 9000) generation. This generational shift is significant: RDNA 4.0 introduces architectural improvements in ray tracing and compute efficiency, while RDNA 3.0 is an earlier design.

The process node differs as well. The PRO W7600 is built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the RX 9070 GRE uses TSMC's 4 nm process. The smaller node allows the RX 9070 GRE to pack 53,900 million transistors into a 357 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 151.0 million per mm². The PRO W7600 has 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a density of 65.2 million per mm². The RX 9070 GRE has more than four times the transistor count, but its die is only about 75% larger, which explains the much higher density.

Core configurations differ substantially. The PRO W7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RX 9070 GRE has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. That is a 50% increase in shading units, a 50% increase in TMUs, and a 50% increase in ROPs. Ray tracing cores also scale up: the PRO W7600 has 32, while the RX 9070 GRE has 48, a 50% increase. Neither card has tensor cores listed.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The PRO W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 9070 GRE has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s. The RX 9070 GRE offers 50% more memory capacity and exactly 50% more bandwidth. Memory clock is identical at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for both cards, so the bandwidth difference comes entirely from the wider bus.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The PRO W7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz and a boost clock of 2440 MHz. The RX 9070 GRE has a lower base clock of 1420 MHz but a much higher boost clock of 2790 MHz, and it also lists a game clock of 2220 MHz. The RX 9070 GRE's boost advantage of 350 MHz helps explain its compute lead despite the lower base frequency. Pixel rate and texture rate follow the core counts: the PRO W7600 manages 156.2 GPixel/s and 312.3 GTexel/s, while the RX 9070 GRE reaches 267.8 GPixel/s and 535.7 GTexel/s. The RX 9070 GRE is 71.4% faster in both metrics, matching the FP32 difference.

FP16 performance reveals an architectural change. The PRO W7600 achieves 39.98 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can double throughput by pairing FP32 units. The RX 9070 GRE achieves 34.28 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 runs at the same rate as FP32. For workloads that rely on FP16, the PRO W7600 is actually faster in absolute terms, despite its overall compute disadvantage. This is a critical distinction for machine learning inference or mixed-precision workloads.

Power and physical design differ as well. The PRO W7600 has a TDP of 130 W, uses a single 6-pin power connector, and occupies a single slot. The RX 9070 GRE has a TDP of 220 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, and is a dual-slot card. The suggested power supply rating is 300 W for the PRO W7600 and 550 W for the RX 9070 GRE. The PRO W7600 is also shorter at 241 mm (9.5 inches) with a height of 115 mm (4.5 inches), while the RX 9070 GRE has no recorded dimensions. The bus interface differs: the PRO W7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 9070 GRE uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are similar in count but not identical: the PRO W7600 has four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the RX 9070 GRE has one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a outputs. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for compute-heavy workloads: the RX 9070 GRE wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 25.4% and offers substantially higher raw throughput in FP32, pixel rate, and texture rate. Its 12 GB memory capacity and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth also provide a practical advantage for large datasets. The 4 nm process and RDNA 4.0 architecture deliver more cores, more ray tracing units, and a higher boost clock. The RX 9070 GRE's lower average benchmark score is a statistical artifact of the 3DMark result, not a reflection of its compute capability. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5424 is a gaming-oriented test, and the card's 87th percentile ranking should be read with that in mind.

The PRO W7600 remains relevant for specific use cases. Its FP16 throughput of 39.98 TFLOPS outpaces the RX 9070 GRE's 34.28 TFLOPS, which matters for mixed-precision workloads. Its 93rd percentile ranking and higher average benchmark score suggest that its Vulkan and OpenCL results are consistently strong. The single-slot design, 130 W TDP, and 300 W suggested PSU make it far easier to integrate into dense workstations or small form factor systems. The 8 GB memory is limiting, but for workloads that fit within that capacity, the PRO W7600 offers professional-grade stability at a lower power envelope.

The RX 9070 GRE is the better choice for users who prioritize raw compute, ray tracing, and memory bandwidth. The PRO W7600 is the better choice for users who need FP16 throughput, lower power draw, single-slot compatibility, or a higher percentile ranking in the database. Both cards are currently listed as Active in production status. The RX 9070 GRE was released on 2025-05-07, while the PRO W7600 was released on 2023-08-02. The PRO W7600 lists the Radeon Pro Vega as its predecessor, while the RX 9070 GRE lists Navi III as its predecessor.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 (PRO W7600) vs RDNA 4.0 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Codename: Hotpink Bonefish (PRO W7600) vs none listed (RX 9070 GRE)
• Generation: Radeon Pro Navi, Navi III Series (PRO W7600) vs Navi IV, RX 9000 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Process node: 6 nm (PRO W7600) vs 4 nm (RX 9070 GRE)
• Transistors: 13,300 million (PRO W7600) vs 53,900 million (RX 9070 GRE)
• Die size: 204 mm² (PRO W7600) vs 357 mm² (RX 9070 GRE)
• Transistor density: 65.2M / mm² (PRO W7600) vs 151.0M / mm² (RX 9070 GRE)
• Base clock: 1720 MHz (PRO W7600) vs 1420 MHz (RX 9070 GRE)
• Boost clock: 2440 MHz (PRO W7600) vs 2790 MHz (RX 9070 GRE)
• Game clock: none listed (PRO W7600) vs 2220 MHz (RX 9070 GRE)
• Memory size: 8 GB (PRO W7600) vs 12 GB (RX 9070 GRE)
• Memory bus width: 128 bit (PRO W7600) vs 192 bit (RX 9070 GRE)
• Memory bandwidth: 288.0 GB/s (PRO W7600) vs 432.0 GB/s (RX 9070 GRE)
• Shading units: 2048 (PRO W7600) vs 3072 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Texture mapping units: 128 (PRO W7600) vs 192 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Render output units: 64 (PRO W7600) vs 96 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Ray tracing cores: 32 (PRO W7600) vs 48 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Pixel rate: 156.2 GPixel/s (PRO W7600) vs 267.8 GPixel/s (RX 9070 GRE)
• Texture rate: 312.3 GTexel/s (PRO W7600) vs 535.7 GTexel/s (RX 9070 GRE)
• FP32 performance: 19.99 TFLOPS (PRO W7600) vs 34.28 TFLOPS (RX 9070 GRE)
• FP16 performance: 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) (PRO W7600) vs 34.28 TFLOPS (1:1) (RX 9070 GRE)
• TDP: 130 W (PRO W7600) vs 220 W (RX 9070 GRE)
• Slot width: Single-slot (PRO W7600) vs Dual-slot (RX 9070 GRE)
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin (PRO W7600) vs 2x 8-pin (RX 9070 GRE)
• Suggested PSU: 300 W (PRO W7600) vs 550 W (RX 9070 GRE)
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 (PRO W7600) vs PCIe 5.0 x16 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.1 (PRO W7600) vs 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a (RX 9070 GRE)
• Dimensions: 241 mm length, 115 mm height (PRO W7600) vs none recorded (RX 9070 GRE)
• Release date: 2023-08-02 (PRO W7600) vs 2025-05-07 (RX 9070 GRE)
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega (PRO W7600) vs Navi III (RX 9070 GRE)
• Launch MSRP: 599 USD (PRO W7600) vs 549 USD (RX 9070 GRE)

Identical specifications include manufacturer (AMD), foundry (TSMC), memory type (GDDR6), memory clock (2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective), tensor cores (none listed), DirectX support (12 Ultimate, 12_2), OpenGL support (4.6), Vulkan support (1.4), and production status (Active).

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the head-to-head benchmark between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 109309 against 81528 for the PRO W7600, a delta of 25.4% in its favor.

Q: How much faster is the RX 9070 GRE in FP32 compute?

A: The RX 9070 GRE delivers 34.34.28 TFLOPS of FP32 performance compared to 19.99 TFLOPS for the PRO W7600, a 71.4% advantage in theoretical peak throughput.

Q: Why does the PRO W7600 have a higher average benchmark score?

A: The PRO W7600 has an average benchmark score of 87108 across its recorded tests, which includes a Geekbench Vulkan result of 92688, while the RX 9070 GRE's average of 57367 includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5424, which lowers its average.

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

A: The PRO W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 9070 GRE has 12 GB of 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, a 50% increase in capacity and bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports FP16 at a faster rate?

A: The PRO W7600 achieves 39.98 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, which is faster than the RX 9070 GRE's 34.28 TFLOPS at 1:1.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The PRO W7600 has a 130 W TDP with a 1x 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the RX 9070 GRE has a 220 W TDP