AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs NVIDIA Tesla T4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and the NVIDIA Tesla T4 across both benchmark workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon PRO W7700 scores 108,245, while the Tesla T4 scores 61,276, resulting in a 76.7% advantage for the AMD card. The Vulkan workload shows an even larger margin: the Radeon PRO W7700 reaches 129,706, the Tesla T4 delivers 72,190, and the AMD part leads by 79.7%. These are not marginal wins; the W7700 essentially doubles the T4's output in both APIs.

Looking at the aggregate benchmark score, the Radeon PRO W7700 averages 118,976 across all recorded tests, while the Tesla T4 averages 66,733. That is a raw gap of 52,243 points, which places the W7700 in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database, versus the 90th percentile for the T4. The delta between these percentiles matters: the W7700 sits among the top 5% of all recorded graphics cards, while the T4 sits in the top 10%, but with a substantially lower absolute score.

The nearest rivals for each card contextualize these results further. The Radeon PRO W7700's closest competitor in the database is the NVIDIA GB10, which averages 117,393, only 1.3% behind the AMD card. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation follows at 117,088, a 1.6% deficit. The Tesla T4's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon VII at 66,004, which is 1.1% behind the T4, and the NVIDIA Tesla P40 at 65,095, 2.5% behind. This means the T4 is competitive within its own performance tier, but that tier is far below where the W7700 operates.

In the head-to-head results, the AMD card wins both recorded tests, giving it a 2-0 record. There is no benchmark in the database where the Tesla T4 outperforms the Radeon PRO W7700. The smallest delta between the two is the OpenCL test at 76.7%, and the largest is Vulkan at 79.7%. These numbers indicate that the W7700's lead is consistent across APIs, not isolated to a single workload.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 wins in every measured category, but the nature of those wins matters for different use cases. In OpenCL, the W7700's 108,245 versus the T4's 61,276 suggests a strong advantage in general-purpose compute tasks that rely on OpenCL acceleration, such as rendering, simulation, and scientific workloads. The 76.7% lead means that tasks taking one unit of time on the T4 would take roughly 0.57 units on the W7700, a substantial reduction in wall-clock time for batch processing.

In Vulkan, the W7700's 129,706 versus the T4's 72,190 represents a 79.7% advantage. Vulkan is often used in real-time graphics, game engines, and compute-heavy visual effects. The larger delta here suggests the W7700's architecture handles the lower-level API overhead more efficiently, which could translate to smoother interactive workloads and faster frame generation in Vulkan-based applications. The T4, by contrast, was designed for inference and datacenter tasks, and its lower clock speeds and older architecture limit its Vulkan throughput.

The T4's 90th percentile ranking versus the W7700's 95th percentile means the T4 is not a weak card by absolute database standards; it competes with the Radeon VII and Tesla P40. However, for any workload where raw compute throughput is the bottleneck, the W7700 is the clear choice. The T4's advantages lie elsewhere: it is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a 70 W TDP, making it suitable for dense server installations where space and thermal limits are strict. The W7700 requires a dual-slot footprint, a 190 W TDP, and a 450 W suggested PSU, which is a different deployment profile.

For users prioritizing raw benchmark scores, the W7700 wins outright. For users prioritizing low-power, compact server acceleration, the T4's form factor and power draw are its only redeeming qualities, though these are not reflected in the benchmark data.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures from different eras. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Wheat Nas, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 28,100 million transistors packed into a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA Tesla T4 uses the TU104 chip with Turing architecture, belongs to the Tesla Turing (Txx) generation, and is built on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It contains 13,600 million transistors on a much larger 545 mm² die, giving a transistor density of only 25.0M per mm².

The process node difference is stark: 5 nm versus 12 nm. This explains the dramatic disparity in transistor density and power efficiency. The W7700 packs more than twice the transistors into a smaller die, which directly contributes to its higher performance numbers. The T4's older 12 nm process limits its clock speeds and efficiency; its base clock is 585 MHz and boost clock is 1590 MHz, while the W7700 runs at a base of 1900 MHz and boosts to 2600 MHz.

Memory architecture also diverges. Both cards have 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but the W7700's memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), yielding 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the T4's memory runs at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective), producing only 320.0 GB/s. That is a 256 GB/s difference, which heavily impacts memory-bound workloads like large dataset processing and high-resolution texture streaming.

The compute resources are similarly lopsided. The W7700 has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation units, along with 48 ray tracing cores. The T4 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores, but it also includes 320 tensor cores, which the W7700 lacks entirely. The T4's tensor cores enable its use for AI inference, but the recorded benchmarks do not include any tensor-based tests. The W7700's FP32 throughput is 31.95 TFLOPS, while the T4 manages 8.141 TFLOPS, a factor of roughly 3.9. FP16 follows the same pattern: 63.90 TFLOPS for the W7700 versus 16.28 TFLOPS for the T4.

Pixel and texture rates reinforce the gap. The W7700 achieves 249.6 GPixel/s and 499.2 GTexel/s, while the T4 achieves 101.8 GPixel/s and 254.4 GTexel/s. These differences directly affect rasterization-heavy workloads, where the W7700's higher ROP and TMU counts, combined with faster clocks, produce significantly higher fill rates.

The bus interface differs as well: the W7700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the T4 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. This halves the theoretical bandwidth to the host system for the T4, though the practical impact depends on workload. The W7700 also has 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the T4 has no display outputs, indicating its server-only intent.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 averages 118,976, while the NVIDIA Tesla T4 averages 66,733. The W7700's score is roughly 78% higher than the T4's.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD card show the largest lead over the Tesla T4?

A: The largest lead is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the W7700 scores 129,706 versus the T4's 72,190, a delta of 79.7%. The OpenCL lead is 76.7% (108,245 versus 61,276).

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two cards?

A: The Radeon PRO W7700 has a TDP of 190 W and requires a 450 W suggested PSU with a single 8-pin connector, while the Tesla T4 has a 70 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU with no power connectors.

Q: Does the Tesla T4 have any advantage in compute features?

A: Yes, the T4 includes 320 tensor cores, which the W7700 does not have. However, the recorded benchmarks do not test tensor performance, so this advantage is not reflected in the scores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each card?

A: The W7700 provides 576.0 GB/s from its GDDR6 memory at 18 Gbps effective, while the T4 provides 320.0 GB/s from its GDDR6 memory at 10 Gbps effective.

Q: Which card is physically smaller?

A: The Tesla T4 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length, while the Radeon PRO W7700 is a dual-slot card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two cards differ, based on the recorded database entries.

| Field | AMD Radeon PRO W7700 | NVIDIA Tesla T4 |

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

| Chip | Navi 32 | TU104 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Turing |

| Codename | Wheat Nas | (none recorded) |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) | Tesla Turing (Txx) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | 13,600 million |

| Die Size | 346 mm² | 545 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 81.2M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1900 MHz | 585 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2600 MHz | 1590 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1250 MHz, 10 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 320.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 192 | 160 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 48 | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | (none) | 320 |

| Pixel Rate | 249.6 GPixel/s | 101.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 499.2 GTexel/s | 254.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 31.95 TFLOPS | 8.141 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 63.90 TFLOPS (2:1) | 16.28 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 190 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | No outputs |

| Dimensions (Length) | 241 mm (9.5 inches) | 168 mm (6.6 inches) |

| Dimensions (Height) | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | (none recorded) |

| Production Status | (none recorded) | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-11-12 | 2018-09-12 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Tesla Volta |

| Successor | (none recorded) | Server Ampere |

| Launch MSRP | 999 USD | (none recorded) |

The specification differences explain the benchmark outcomes. The W7700's 5 nm process, higher clocks, larger shading unit count, and double the memory bandwidth all contribute to its commanding lead. The T4's sole feature advantage, 320 tensor cores, is not represented in the recorded benchmark suite, so it offers no measurable benefit in OpenCL or Vulkan tests. The T4's end-of-life status and 2018 release date also indicate it is a legacy product, while the W7700 is a recent release from 2023. For any workload measured in the database, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is the superior performer.