AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile Comparison

# AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile represent two very different approaches to professional graphics: one is a modern desktop workstation card built on a 5 nm process, while the other is a mobile Ampere part designed for laptops. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner—the W7700 wins both head-to-head tests—but the nature of those wins reveals a more complex story about workload suitability, API efficiency, and architectural philosophy.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 dominates both recorded benchmark categories, making it the straightforward choice for users prioritizing raw compute throughput. Its OpenCL score of 108,245 edges out the RTX A4500 Mobile’s 105,307 by a modest 2.8%—a margin that suggests near-parity in general-purpose compute workloads. However, the Vulkan results tell a dramatically different story: the W7700 scores 129,706 versus the RTX A4500 Mobile’s 76,960, a staggering 68.5% advantage. This indicates the W7700’s RDNA 3.0 architecture is exceptionally well-optimized for Vulkan’s explicit, low-overhead API model, while the Ampere mobile part appears significantly less efficient in that environment.

For users whose workflows rely heavily on Vulkan—think real-time visualization, game development, or certain CAD applications—the W7700 is not just better; it is in a different performance class entirely. The RTX A4500 Mobile’s only potential territory of advantage lies in scenarios not captured by these two benchmarks. The data shows zero wins for the NVIDIA part across the tested categories. Its 184 tensor cores could theoretically accelerate AI workloads, but the FACT PACK provides no benchmark scores for those tasks, so any such advantage remains speculative rather than data-supported.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural divide between these two GPUs explains their performance disparity. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. This node advantage is stark: the W7700 packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The RTX A4500 Mobile’s GA104 chip, by contrast, uses Samsung’s 8 nm process, fitting 17,400 million transistors into a larger 392 mm² die with just 44.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The W7700 achieves nearly double the transistor density, which translates directly into efficiency and performance headroom.

Clock speeds amplify this difference. The W7700 runs at a 1900 MHz base and 2600 MHz boost, while the RTX A4500 Mobile operates at a much lower 930 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. This nearly 73% higher boost clock on the AMD side, combined with the denser process, explains why the W7700 achieves 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 performance against the RTX A4500 Mobile’s 17.66 TFLOPS. The shading unit counts tell an intriguing story: the NVIDIA part has 5,888 shading units versus the AMD’s 3,072, yet the AMD still delivers nearly double the FP32 throughput thanks to its clock speed advantage and architectural efficiency.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity—both have 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus—but the W7700 runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, yielding 576.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the RTX A4500 Mobile’s 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps, and 512.0 GB/s. The W7700 also features 48 RT cores versus 46, and 192 TMUs versus 184, though both have 96 ROPs. The RTX A4500 Mobile’s unique asset is its 184 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test provides the closest contest between these two cards. AMD’s Radeon PRO W7700 scores 108,245 against NVIDIA’s 105,307, a 2.8% delta. This narrow margin is remarkable given the architectural differences—the W7700’s massive clock advantage and bandwidth lead are nearly neutralized in this API. It suggests OpenCL’s abstraction layer tends to flatten performance differences, or that the RTX A4500 Mobile’s higher shading unit count compensates for its lower clocks in this particular workload.

The Vulkan benchmark shatters that near-parity. The W7700’s 129,706 score versus the RTX A4500 Mobile’s 76,960 represents a 68.5% gap—one of the largest deltas typically seen between two professional GPUs in the same performance tier. This result implies the RDNA 3.0 architecture’s Vulkan implementation is vastly more efficient, possibly due to better driver optimization or hardware-level scheduling improvements. The RTX A4500 Mobile’s Vulkan score is actually lower than its OpenCL score, which is unusual and suggests the Ampere mobile part struggles with Vulkan’s explicit command buffers and multi-threaded recording model.

Contextualizing these scores against the wider market, the W7700’s average benchmark score of 118,976 places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393, just 1.3% lower), the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation (117,088, 1.6% lower), the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395, 4% lower), and the RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944, 4.4% lower). The RTX A4500 Mobile’s average score of 91,134 sits at the 93rd percentile, with closest competitors being the RTX A4500 (91,671, 0.6% higher), Radeon Instinct MI60 (92,466, 1.4% higher), Quadro GP100 (87,445, 4.2% lower), and Radeon PRO W7600 (87,108, 4.6% lower). Notably, the W7700’s average score is 30.6% higher than the RTX A4500 Mobile’s average—a substantial gap that places them in different performance tiers despite similar memory capacities.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 for virtually every professional workload measured. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 30.6% higher average score, and achieves a higher percentile ranking (95th versus 93rd). The Vulkan advantage alone—68.5% faster—makes the W7700 the defensible choice for any application built on that API, which includes many modern DCC tools, game engines, and VR applications.

The RTX A4500 Mobile’s case rests entirely on its form factor and feature set rather than raw performance. As a mobile part with no power connectors, a 140 W TDP, and portable-device-dependent display outputs, it serves a specific niche: high-end laptops where desktop performance is impossible. Its 184 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for AI inference and DLSS-style features that the W7700 cannot match, but the FACT PACK contains no benchmarks validating this advantage. The NVIDIA card is also end-of-life, with a successor in the Ada-MW generation already named, while the W7700 remains a current product with a 999 USD launch MSRP.

For workstation users with desktop chassis, the W7700 is the data-backed recommendation. Its higher clock speeds, superior bandwidth, and architectural efficiency deliver measurable wins in both OpenCL and Vulkan. The RTX A4500 Mobile only makes sense in mobile deployments where its 140 W power envelope and compact design are non-negotiable requirements—and even then, the RTX A5500 Mobile (4.4% lower average score than the W7700) exists as a potentially stronger mobile competitor. The verdict is clear: choose the W7700 for performance, choose the RTX A4500 Mobile only if portability is mandatory.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 delivers 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 versus the RTX A4500 Mobile’s 17.66 TFLOPS, making the AMD card roughly 81% faster in theoretical peak compute.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan workloads?

A: The W7700 scores 129,706 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 76,960 for the RTX A4500 Mobile, a 68.5% advantage that represents the largest performance gap between the two across all tested benchmarks.

Q: Are the memory configurations identical?

A: Both cards feature 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but the W7700 operates at 18 Gbps effective with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX A4500 Mobile runs at 16 Gbps with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RTX A4500 Mobile have any unique hardware features?

A: Yes, it includes 184 tensor cores for AI acceleration, which the W7700 lacks entirely. However, no benchmark data in this comparison validates any performance advantage from these cores.

Q: Which card is better positioned in the current market?

A: The W7700 has a 95th percentile ranking versus 93rd for the RTX A4500 Mobile. The NVIDIA card is marked end-of-life with a successor (Ada-MW) announced, while the AMD card remains a current product.

Q: How significant is the power consumption difference?

A: The W7700 has a 190 W TDP with a 450 W suggested PSU and one 8-pin connector, while the RTX A4500 Mobile draws 140 W with no power connectors, reflecting its mobile design intent.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7700 | NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | 17,400 million |

| Die Size | 346 mm² | 392 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 81.2M / mm² | 44.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1900 MHz | 930 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2600 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 5888 |

| TMUs | 192 | 184 |

| RT Cores | 48 | 46 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 184 |

| Pixel Rate | 249.6 GPixel/s | 144.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 499.2 GTexel/s | 276.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 31.95 TFLOPS | 17.66 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 63.90 TFLOPS (2:1) | 17.66 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 190 W | 140 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | Not specified |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Production Status | Not specified | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-11-12 | 2022-03-21 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Quadro Turing-M |

| Successor | Not specified | Ada-MW |

| Launch MSRP | 999 USD | Not specified |