AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs AMD Radeon RX 7900M Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and AMD Radeon RX 7900M share the same Navi 31 chip and RDNA 3.0 architecture, but they are engineered for very different roles. The database shows a clear separation in benchmark results, with the PRO W7800 leading in both recorded compute and graphics API tests, while the RX 7900M offers a distinct mobile-oriented configuration. This analysis covers their architectural differences, performance splits, and which workloads each card is better suited for, based strictly on the recorded measurements.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the stronger performer in the recorded head-to-head benchmarks. It wins both available comparisons, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 154366 against 129499 for the RX 7900M, a 19.2% advantage. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the PRO W7800 scores 175422 versus 158760, a 10.5% lead. For any workload that relies on raw compute throughput or Vulkan-based rendering, the data points squarely at the PRO W7800.

The RX 7900M, however, is not without its own merits. It carries a higher shading unit count (4608 vs 4480), more texture mapping units (288 vs 280), and more ROPs (192 vs 128). Its pixel rate of 401.3 GPixel/s exceeds the PRO W7800's 323.2 GPixel/s, indicating a theoretical advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios, even though no direct head-to-head benchmark in the database confirms this. The RX 7900M also operates at a lower TDP of 180 W versus 260 W for the PRO W7800, and it is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors, making it suitable for portable systems.

Who should pick which? For professional workstations, content creation, or any environment where the higher OpenCL and Vulkan scores matter, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the choice. Its 32 GB memory capacity doubles the RX 7900M's 16 GB, which is critical for large datasets. For mobile or power-constrained systems where a discrete GPU card cannot be installed, the RX 7900M presents a capable option, but the recorded benchmark data shows it trails the PRO W7800 by a meaningful margin in both OpenCL and Vulkan performance.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the Navi 31 chip, using TSMC's 5 nm process, with a die size of 529 mm² and 57,700 million transistors. The transistor density is identical at 109.1M per mm². The architecture is RDNA 3.0 for both, and the codename is Plum Bonito. The core difference lies in their implementation: the PRO W7800 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 260 W TDP, while the RX 7900M is an IGP for portable devices with a 180 W TDP and no power connectors.

Clock speeds differ notably. The PRO W7800 has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost clock of 2525 MHz, while the RX 7900M runs lower at 1825 MHz base and 2090 MHz boost. This clock advantage contributes to the PRO W7800's higher FP32 throughput of 45.25 TFLOPS, compared to 38.52 TFLOPS for the RX 7900M. The FP16 figures follow the same pattern: 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 77.05 TFLOPS (2:1).

Memory configurations are another key split. The PRO W7800 offers 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the RX 7900M offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on the same 256-bit bus. Both achieve identical memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s and use the same memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The RX 7900M compensates for its lower bandwidth per byte with more ROPs (192 vs 128), which boosts its pixel rate to 401.3 GPixel/s versus the PRO W7800's 323.2 GPixel/s. Conversely, the PRO W7800 has a higher texture rate of 707.0 GTexel/s versus 601.9 GTexel/s for the RX 7900M, despite having fewer TMUs (280 vs 288), due to its higher clocks.

Ray tracing hardware is nearly identical: the PRO W7800 has 70 RT cores, while the RX 7900M has 72. Neither card features tensor cores, as both rely on standard RDNA 3.0 compute units. The API support is the same for both: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for both.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record favors the PRO W7800 in compute and graphics API workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the PRO W7800 leads by 19.2%, a substantial margin that reflects its higher FP32 throughput and higher clock speeds. In Geekbench Vulkan, the lead is 10.5%, still comfortable but narrower, suggesting the RX 7900M's higher ROP count and pixel rate help close the gap in graphics-oriented tasks.

The RX 7900M's theoretical strengths lie in pixel fill rate and its lower power envelope. With a pixel rate of 401.3 GPixel/s versus 323.2 GPixel/s, the RX 7900M could excel in resolution-scaling or post-processing tasks that are fill-rate limited, though no direct benchmark in the database verifies this. Its 180 W TDP and IGP form factor make it the only viable choice for portable devices, where the PRO W7800's dual-slot dimensions and 2x 8-pin power connectors are impractical.

For memory-intensive workloads, the PRO W7800 wins outright on capacity. Its 32 GB of GDDR6 is double the RX 7900M's 16 GB, and while both share the same 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, the larger pool allows for larger texture sets, bigger simulation grids, or more extensive machine learning datasets. The RX 7900M, with half the memory, would hit capacity limits sooner in such scenarios.

The PRO W7800 also holds a percentile advantage, sitting in the 97th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7900M sits in the 94th percentile. The PRO W7800's average benchmark score is 164894, compared to 97487 for the RX 7900M. That difference, while influenced by the inclusion of a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score in the RX 7900M's results (4201), still reflects a higher overall measured performance tier for the PRO W7800.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800, with 45.25 TFLOPS versus 38.52 TFLOPS for the RX 7900M.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, both achieve 576.0 GB/s with GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, but the PRO W7800 has 32 GB while the RX 7900M has 16 GB.

Q: Which card is better for Vulkan-based applications?

A: The PRO W7800, based on a Geekbench Vulkan score of 175422 versus 158760 for the RX 7900M, a 10.5% lead.

Q: Is the RX 7900M a desktop card?

A: No, it is an IGP (integrated graphics package) with no power connectors, designed for portable devices, and its display outputs are portable device dependent.

Q: Which GPU has more render output units?

A: The RX 7900M has 192 ROPs, compared to 128 for the PRO W7800, giving it a higher pixel rate of 401.3 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The PRO W7800 has a TDP of 260 W, while the RX 7900M operates at 180 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two direct comparisons in the database are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In the OpenCL test, the PRO W7800 scores 154366, beating the RX 7900M's 129499 by 19.2%. This is the largest recorded gap between the two cards and aligns with the PRO W7800's higher FP32 throughput (45.25 TFLOPS vs 38.52 TFLOPS) and higher boost clock (2525 MHz vs 2090 MHz). The 19.2% delta is significant enough to be felt in any compute-heavy workload, such as rendering, simulation, or data processing.

In the Vulkan test, the PRO W7800 scores 175422 against 158760, a 10.5% advantage. This narrower margin suggests that the RX 7900M's higher pixel rate (401.3 GPixel/s vs 323.2 GPixel/s) and additional ROPs help it stay competitive in graphics API workloads, even though it still loses. The PRO W7800's higher texture rate (707.0 GTexel/s vs 601.9 GTexel/s) likely contributes to its win, as Vulkan tests often stress both vertex and fragment processing.

The RX 7900M has an additional benchmark in the database, a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4201, but no corresponding score exists for the PRO W7800, so no direct comparison can be made. This 3DMark score, combined with the RX 7900M's lower OpenCL and Vulkan scores, results in an average benchmark score of 97487 for the RX 7900M, far below the PRO W7800's 164894. The PRO W7800's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A5500 (average score 165217, delta of -0.2%), the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166094, -0.7%), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X (168574, -2.2%), placing it in a competitive professional tier. The RX 7900M's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97131, delta of 0.4%), the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 (101872, -4.3%), and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91671, 6.3%), showing it sits in a lower performance bracket.

The verdict is clear: for raw compute and Vulkan performance, the PRO W7800 is the superior card in every recorded head-to-head metric. The RX 7900M offers architectural advantages in fill rate and power efficiency, but those do not translate into benchmark wins in the available data. The PRO W7800's 32 GB memory, higher clocks, and higher percentile ranking (97 vs 94) make it the more capable workstation GPU, while the RX 7900M serves a niche for portable systems where its IGP design and 180 W TDP are essential constraints.