AMD Radeon PRO W7600 vs NVIDIA Tesla P40 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy between these two professional GPUs. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins both recorded head-to-head tests outright, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test with a 31.5% lead and the Vulkan test with a 36% lead. Its average benchmark score of 87108 places it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the NVIDIA Tesla P40 manages an average of 65095, sitting in the 89th percentile. For any workload that relies on compute performance, the Radeon PRO W7600 is the stronger card.

However, the Tesla P40 is not without purpose. Its 24 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 347.1 GB/s of bandwidth, dwarfs the W7600's 8 GB GDDR6 configuration with 288.0 GB/s. The P40 also remains a viable option for deployments that require large memory capacity without the need for display outputs, as it is a compute-only accelerator. The W7600, by contrast, offers four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and a single-slot form factor, making it a more flexible workstation card.

The production status tells a separate story. The W7600 is listed as Active and launched on 2023-08-02, whereas the P40 is End-of-life, having launched on 2016-09-12. The Radeon card is the modern choice with architectural advantages; the Tesla is a legacy part that persists only because of its memory capacity. Buyers needing raw compute should choose the W7600. Buyers needing maximum VRAM for large datasets on a legacy platform may still consider the P40, but they accept an older architecture and a dual-slot, 250 W power envelope.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs spans nearly a decade of process technology and design philosophy. The Radeon PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. It packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The Tesla P40, in contrast, uses the GP102 chip on the Pascal architecture, built on TSMC's 16 nm process. It contains 11,800 million transistors spread across a much larger 471 mm² die, yielding a density of just 25.1 million per square millimeter. The newer 6 nm process allows the W7600 to pack more transistors into less than half the silicon area.

Core configurations differ significantly. The W7600 features 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. It also includes 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pascal-based P40. The P40 counters with 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, reflecting its larger, older design. Despite having fewer shading units, the W7600 achieves higher clock speeds: a 1720 MHz base and 2440 MHz boost, compared to the P40's 1303 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost. This clock advantage drives the W7600 to 19.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the P40 manages 11.76 TFLOPS. The FP16 comparison is even more stark: the W7600 delivers 39.98 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, whereas the P40 provides only 183.7 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, making it effectively unsuitable for half-precision workloads.

Memory subsystems reflect different design goals. The W7600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, running at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed for 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The P40 uses 24 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, running at 1808 MHz with 7.2 Gbps effective speed for 347.1 GB/s bandwidth. The P40's raw bandwidth advantage of 59.1 GB/s comes from its wider bus, but the W7600's GDDR6 memory operates at a much higher effective clock.

Other differentiating features include the bus interface. The W7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the P40 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The W7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the P40 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. Power requirements also differ: the W7600 carries a 130 W TDP with a single 6-pin connector and a suggested 300 W PSU, while the P40 draws 250 W, requires an 8-pin EPS connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU. The W7600 is single-slot and measures 241 mm in length; the P40 is dual-slot and 267 mm long.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 winning both benchmark tests with substantial margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the W7600 scores 81528 against the P40's 62017, a delta of 31.5%. In Geekbench Vulkan, the W7600 scores 92688 against the P40's 68172, a delta of 36%. The Vulkan result is the larger victory, indicating that the RDNA 3.0 architecture scales particularly well in that API.

Contextualizing these scores against the database's nearest rivals clarifies the competitive landscape. The W7600's average score of 87108 places it just 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 (87445) and 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85637). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91134) by 4.4% and the desktop RTX A4500 (91671) by 5%. The W7600 sits in a compact cluster where a 5% swing separates it from the RTX A4500, meaning its position among contemporaries is competitive but not dominant.

The P40's average score of 65095 places it 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64212) and 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon VII (66004). It is exactly 2% ahead of both the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63842) and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63830). The P40's position is similarly tight, but its overall average sits roughly 25% below the W7600's. The delta between the two cards in average benchmark score is 22013 points, a gap that no amount of architectural nostalgia can close.

The individual benchmark deltas are consistent across both tests, with the Vulkan gap (36%) slightly larger than the OpenCL gap (31.5%). Neither test shows a scenario where the P40 closes the divide. The W7600 wins 2 out of 2 recorded comparisons, and the P40 records 0 wins.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has an average benchmark score of 87108, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA Tesla P40 has an average score of 65095, placing it in the 89th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the Radeon PRO W7600 in the head-to-head tests?

A: The W7600 leads by 31.5% in Geekbench OpenCL (81528 vs 62017) and by 36% in Geekbench Vulkan (92688 vs 68172).

Q: Does the Tesla P40 have any advantages in memory capacity?

A: Yes, the P40 offers 24 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus with 347.1 GB/s bandwidth. The W7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The W7600 has a 130 W TDP with a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested 300 W PSU. The P40 has a 250 W TDP with an 8-pin EPS connector and a suggested 600 W PSU.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 includes ray tracing cores, with 32 RT cores on the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The NVIDIA Tesla P40 has no ray tracing cores.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: The Radeon PRO W7600 is listed as Active with a release date of 2023-08-02. The Tesla P40 is End-of-life, released on 2016-09-12 with the Tesla Volta as its successor.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 dominates compute-bound workloads. Its 19.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is 70% higher than the P40's 11.76 TFLOPS. For FP16 workloads, the W7600's 39.98 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio makes it suitable for AI inference and half-precision training, whereas the P40's 183.7 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio makes such tasks impractical. The W7600's 32 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering, a feature the P40 lacks entirely. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) ensures compatibility with the latest graphics APIs. The single-slot design, 130 W TDP, and 300 W suggested PSU make it far easier to integrate into workstation builds. Its four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs allow direct monitor connectivity, which is essential for interactive workstation use. The 93rd percentile ranking confirms its position as a high-performing card relative to the entire database.

The NVIDIA Tesla P40 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 24 GB of GDDR5 memory across a 384-bit bus delivers 347.1 GB/s, which is 59.1 GB/s more than the W7600. For workloads that require loading very large models or datasets that exceed 8 GB, the P40's capacity advantage is decisive. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides full x16 bandwidth, though on an older PCIe generation. The P40's 3840 shading units and 240 TMUs give it higher texture rate (367.4 GTexel/s vs 312.3 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (147.0 GPixel/s vs 156.2 GPixel/s, the W7600 wins pixel rate). The P40 remains a functional compute card for legacy server deployments, though its End-of-life status and lack of display outputs limit its appeal. Its 89th percentile ranking shows it still outperforms the majority of GPUs in the database, but it sits 4 percentiles below the W7600.

The decision matrix is straightforward. The W7600 is the choice for modern workstation tasks, ray tracing, FP16 compute, and any environment where power and space are constrained. The P40 is the choice for memory-bound inference or rendering workloads that need more than 8 GB of VRAM and can tolerate an older, dual-slot, higher-power card with no display output. The recorded data favors the W7600 in every benchmark, but the P40's unique memory configuration keeps it relevant in narrow use cases.