AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs NVIDIA A10M Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and NVIDIA A10M represent two distinct philosophies in professional graphics, targeting different segments with divergent architectural priorities. The data available shows the W7800 leading in raw compute, but the A10M holds its own in specific workloads through sheer shader count and specialized hardware. This analysis breaks down what the benchmark results and specifications actually mean for potential users.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 scores 154366 against the NVIDIA A10M’s 135230. This gives the W7800 a 14.2% advantage in this test. That is not a narrow margin; it indicates a substantial performance gap in general-purpose compute tasks that utilize OpenCL. The W7800’s average benchmark score of 164894 further reinforces its position, placing it 97th percentile among all GPUs, while the A10M’s average of 135230 sits at the 96th percentile. This shows both are high-end parts, but the W7800 is operating in a higher performance tier.

Looking at the W7800’s rivals, its average score of 164894 is only 0.2% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 (165217) and 0.7% behind the RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166094). It is, however, 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (162504) and 2.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X (168574). This positions the W7800 as a top-tier competitor, trading blows with the best of the previous generation. The A10M’s closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation, with a delta of 0%, showing they are effectively tied in average performance. It also trails the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 by a negligible 0.1% and the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo by 0.4%. The data suggests the A10M is a solid mid-to-high-range performer, but it is not in the same league as the W7800 in this specific compute test.

The difference in OpenCL scores is particularly telling given the A10M’s higher shading unit count. It seems the W7800’s architecture is more efficient at executing these workloads, or its significantly higher clock speeds are making the difference. The 14.2% delta is the single most important number in this comparison, as it defines the W7800’s clear victory in the one test where they are directly compared.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for raw compute performance: the AMD Radeon PRO W7800. Its 14.2% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is decisive. For any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU compute, the W7800 is the stronger choice. Its average benchmark score is also significantly higher, confirming its overall performance advantage.

However, the NVIDIA A10M should not be dismissed. Its 96th percentile ranking shows it is a capable professional card. The data shows it is perfectly competitive with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation, tying it exactly in average score. For users who are already in the NVIDIA ecosystem or who have specific needs that favor its architecture, the A10M remains a viable option. The W7800 is the performance leader, but the A10M is a competent alternative, especially in scenarios where its specific feature set or power profile is more important than raw compute throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip with the RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Plum Bonito. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. This advanced node allows for a very high transistor density of 109.1M / mm², with a total of 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. In contrast, the NVIDIA A10M uses the GA102 chip with the Ampere architecture. It is built on an 8 nm process at Samsung, resulting in a much lower transistor density of 45.1M / mm². Despite this, the A10M’s die is larger at 628 mm², but it contains far fewer transistors at 28,300 million.

These architectural differences lead to divergent design priorities. The RDNA 3.0 architecture in the W7800 is designed for high efficiency and high clock speeds, which is reflected in its 1895 MHz base and 2525 MHz boost clocks. The Ampere architecture in the A10M is clocked much lower, with a 975 MHz base and 1635 MHz boost, but it compensates with a massive number of shading units. The W7800 has 4480 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, while the A10M has 7168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The A10M also includes 224 tensor cores for AI acceleration, a feature the W7800 lacks, while the W7800 has 70 ray tracing cores to the A10M’s 56.

The memory subsystems also reflect different strategies. The W7800 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, achieving a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The A10M uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a wider 320-bit bus, but with a lower effective memory clock, resulting in 500.2 GB/s bandwidth. The W7800’s higher bandwidth is a key factor in its compute performance, as it allows data to be fed to the GPU faster.

Specification Differences

There are several key specification differences between the two cards that go beyond the core architecture. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is a Dual-slot card that requires 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. It has a TDP of 260 W. The NVIDIA A10M, in contrast, is a Single-slot card that uses a single 8-pin EPS power connector and has a much lower 150 W TDP, with a suggested PSU of 450 W. This makes the A10M significantly easier to integrate into dense server environments where space and power are at a premium.

The display outputs are another major differentiator. The W7800 provides 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, making it suitable for workstation use with multiple monitors. The A10M has No outputs, confirming its role as a dedicated compute or server accelerator that is not meant to drive a display. The W7800 is also longer at 280 mm (11 inches) compared to the A10M’s 267 mm (10.5 inches), and it is wider at 40 mm (1.6 inches) versus the A10M’s single-slot width.

Finally, their production statuses differ. The W7800 is listed as Active, with a release date of 2023-04-12. Its predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega. The A10M is End-of-life, with its predecessor being the Tesla Turing and its successor being Server Ada. This indicates the A10M is a legacy product, while the W7800 is current.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 164894, compared to the NVIDIA A10M’s 135230.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 scores 154366, which is 14.2% higher than the NVIDIA A10M’s 135230, making it the clear winner in this test.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA A10M has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Are there differences in power consumption?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has a TDP of 260 W, while the NVIDIA A10M has a much lower TDP of 150 W.

Q: Can the NVIDIA A10M be used to drive a display?

A: No, the NVIDIA A10M has No outputs, meaning it cannot be connected to a monitor, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has multiple DisplayPort outputs.

Q: Which GPU is currently in production?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is listed as Active, while the NVIDIA A10M is End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins in scenarios where raw compute performance is the primary requirement. Its 14.2% lead in OpenCL benchmarks makes it the superior choice for tasks like scientific simulations, complex rendering, and general-purpose GPU compute. Its higher memory capacity (32 GB) and bandwidth (576.0 GB/s) also give it an advantage in workloads that process large datasets that need to reside in VRAM. Its active production status and support for DisplayPort outputs make it a better fit for traditional workstation tasks that require both compute power and display connectivity.

The NVIDIA A10M wins in scenarios where power efficiency and physical footprint are critical. Its 150 W TDP and Single-slot design make it ideal for dense server racks or multi-GPU configurations where space and thermal headroom are limited. Its 224 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI and machine learning inference tasks, which the W7800 lacks. While its raw compute is lower, its specialized tensor capabilities could give it an edge in specific AI workloads. Its 224 shading units, while not as efficient as the W7800’s, still provide substantial parallel processing power for certain tasks. The A10M is the pragmatic choice for deployment at scale, while the W7800 is the performance champion for single-GPU workloads.