AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 presents an unusual comparison scenario. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has two benchmark entries in the database: a Geekbench OpenCL score of 81528 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 92688. This produces an average benchmark score of 87108. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6, in contrast, has no benchmark entries recorded, resulting in an average benchmark score of 0 and a near-zero comparative standing.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 sits in the 93rd percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the recorded data include the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 with an average score of 87445 and a delta of -0.4 percent, meaning the Quadro GP100 is effectively at parity with the W7600, within a rounding of the average. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX scores 85637, which is 1.7 percent behind the W7600. On the other side, the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile scores 91134, placing it 4.4 percent ahead of the W7600, and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 scores 91671, which is 5 percent ahead. These deltas show that the W7600 sits in a competitive cluster, with the closest rival being the Quadro GP100.

For the NVIDIA B200 SXM6, the database records no benchmark scores, no nearest rivals, and a percentile of 50, which is the midpoint of the distribution but not a meaningful performance marker given the zero scores. The absence of data means no direct head-to-head benchmark comparison can be made from the recorded measurements. The B200 SXM6 does not participate in the same benchmark set as the W7600, so the analysis must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than measured test results.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and target fundamentally different computing environments. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The process node is 6 nm at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The transistor density is 65.2 million per mm². The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip based on the Blackwell architecture, belonging to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 127.8 million per mm². The B200 SXM6 has over 15 times the transistor count of the W7600, and its die area is roughly eight times larger.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The W7600 runs a base clock of 1720 MHz and boosts to 2440 MHz. The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and boosts to 1830 MHz, which indicates a design optimized for sustained throughput under heavy server workloads rather than high single-thread clock rates. Memory configurations are also fundamentally different. The W7600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, with memory at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The B200 SXM6 has 22.5 times the memory capacity and over 28 times the memory bandwidth of the W7600.

Compute resource counts diverge significantly. The W7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 32 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed. The B200 SXM6 has 18944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, 24 render output units, and 592 tensor cores, with no ray tracing cores listed. The B200 SXM6 has over nine times the shading units and over four times the texture units compared to the W7600, but fewer ROPs. Pixel rate for the W7600 is 156.2 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s for the B200 SXM6, reflecting the W7600's higher ROP count and faster clocks. Texture rate for the W7600 is 312.3 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s for the B200 SXM6, showing the latter's massive texture unit advantage.

Floating-point performance shows a clear hierarchy. The W7600 delivers 19.99 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.98 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and 69.34 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The B200 SXM6 has 3.5 times the FP32 throughput and 1.7 times the FP16 throughput of the W7600, and its FP16 runs at full rate rather than half rate. Power envelopes are vastly different, with the W7600 at 130 W TDP and the B200 SXM6 at 1000 W TDP. The W7600 uses a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 300 W, while the B200 SXM6 has no power connector listed but requires a suggested PSU of 1400 W. The form factors are also distinct: the W7600 is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm in length and 115 mm in height, while the B200 SXM6 is an SXM module with no listed dimensions.

Interface and output capabilities differ completely. The W7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16 and has no display outputs. API support also diverges: the W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it is not intended for graphics API workloads in the traditional sense.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and NVIDIA B200 SXM6 are not direct competitors. The W7600 is a client-oriented workstation GPU with display outputs, graphics API support, and a 93rd percentile standing among all GPUs. Its benchmark scores are 81528 in Geekbench OpenCL and 92688 in Geekbench Vulkan, and it sits within 5 percent of several NVIDIA workstation parts in the nearest rivals list. The B200 SXM6 is a server accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and no recorded benchmark scores, placing it at the 50th percentile by default due to zero data.

For workloads that involve graphics rendering, display output, or standard workstation applications, the W7600 has the recorded measurements to support its position. For high-throughput compute tasks such as large-scale floating-point operations or massive memory bandwidth applications, the B200 SXM6 has the architectural specifications to dominate, but the database contains no benchmark evidence to confirm this. The W7600 has 19.99 TFLOPS FP32, while the B200 SXM6 has 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, and the B200 SXM6 has 8.19 TB/s memory bandwidth versus 288.0 GB/s for the W7600. Those figures are from the specification records, not from benchmark tests.

The production status for both is listed as Active. The W7600 was released on 2023-08-02, while the B200 SXM6 was released on 2024-10-31. The W7600 has a predecessor in the Radeon Pro Vega, and the B200 SXM6 has a predecessor in Server Hopper and a successor in Server Rubin. The launch MSRP for the W7600 is 599 USD, and for the B200 SXM6 it is 34,999 USD.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has an average benchmark score of 87108, based on its Geekbench OpenCL score of 81528 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 92688. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has an average benchmark score of 0, as it has no recorded benchmark entries.

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

A: The W7600 is 0.4 percent behind the NVIDIA Quadro GP100, 1.7 percent ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX, 4.4 percent behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile, and 5 percent behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500.

Q: What memory capacities and bandwidths do the two GPUs offer?

A: The W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for each GPU?

A: The W7600 delivers 19.99 TFLOPS FP32, while the B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32. The B200 SXM6 has 3.5 times the FP32 throughput of the W7600.

Q: Do both GPUs support display outputs?

A: No. The W7600 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the B200 SXM6 has no display outputs.

Q: What is the process node and transistor count for each chip?

A: The W7600 uses a 6 nm process with 13,300 million transistors. The B200 SXM6 uses a 5 nm process with 208,000 million transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins in areas related to graphics output and client-side rendering. It has four DisplayPort 2.1 connections, so it can drive multiple displays directly. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which allows it to run standard graphics workloads. Its pixel rate of 156.2 GPixel/s is 3.5 times higher than the B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s, and its 64 ROPs outnumber the B200 SXM6's 24 ROPs. The W7600 also has a much lower power requirement at 130 W TDP versus 1000 W TDP, and it fits in a single-slot form factor with a 241 mm length, making it suitable for conventional workstation chassis. Its benchmark scores place it in the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, and it has a positive delta of 1.7 percent over the NVIDIA CMP 40HX.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 wins in raw compute throughput and memory capacity. It has 18944 shading units versus 2048 for the W7600, and 592 tensor cores versus none for the W7600. Its FP32 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS is 3.5 times the W7600's 19.99 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput of 69.34 TFLOPS is 1.7 times the W7600's 39.98 TFLOPS, with a 1:1 ratio instead of 2:1. The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e memory, which is 22.5 times the W7600's 8 GB, and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, which is over 28 times the W7600's 288.0 GB/s. Texture rate for the B200 SXM6 is 1,083.4 GTexel/s versus 312.3 GTexel/s for the W7600. The B200 SXM6 also uses a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for the W7600, and it has a higher transistor density at 127.8M per mm² versus 65.2M per mm².

The B200 SXM6 is designed for server environments, as indicated by its SXM module form factor, lack of display outputs, and absence of graphics API support. The W7600 is designed for workstation use, with its display outputs and API compatibility. For tasks that require rendering to a screen or using graphics APIs, the W7600 has the necessary features. For tasks that require massive memory bandwidth or high FP32 and FP16 compute, the B200 SXM6 has the specification advantage, though no benchmark data exists to quantify its real-world performance in the database.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category in the recorded data. The process node differs: 6 nm for the W7600 versus 5 nm for the B200 SXM6. Transistor count is 13,300 million for the W7600 versus 208,000 million for the B200 SXM6. Die size is 204 mm² for the W7600 versus 1628 mm² for the B200 SXM6. Transistor density is 65.2M per mm² for the W7600 versus 127.8M per mm² for the B200 SXM6.

Clock speeds show a different pattern: the W7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz and boost of 2440 MHz, while the B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and boost of 1830 MHz. Memory type is GDDR6 for the W7600 versus HBM3e for the B200 SXM6. Memory size is 8 GB versus 180 GB. Bus width is 128 bit versus 8192 bit. Memory bandwidth is 288.0 GB/s versus 8.19 TB/s. Memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the W7600 versus 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the B200 SXM6.

Shading units are 2048 for the W7600 versus 18944 for the B200 SXM6. Texture mapping units are 128 versus 592. Render output units are 64 versus 24. Ray tracing cores are 32 for the W7600, with none listed for the B200 SXM6. Tensor cores are none for the W7600 versus 592 for the B200 SXM6. Pixel rate is 156.2 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 312.3 GTexel/s versus 1,083.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 19.99 TFLOPS versus 69.34 TFLOPS. FP16 is 39.98 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP is 130 W for the W7600 versus 1000 W for the B200 SXM6. Slot width is single-slot for the W7600 versus SXM Module for the B200 SXM6. Power connector is 1x 6-pin for the W7600, with none listed for the B200 SXM6. Suggested PSU is 300 W versus 1400 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 6.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.1 for the W7600 versus no outputs for the B200 SXM6. API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan is present for the W7600 and listed as N/A for the B200 SXM6. The W7600 has length and height dimensions of 241 mm and 115 mm, while the B200 SXM6 has no dimensions recorded. Release dates are 2023-08-02 for the W7600 and 2024-10-31 for the B200 SXM6.