AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 scores 334,370 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 scores 154,366. This gives the RTX 5090 a 53.8% lead over the W7800 in this workload.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 5090 leads again, scoring 376,728 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 175,422 for the W7800, a difference of 53.4% in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two cards?

A: Both cards have 32 GB of memory, but they use different types: the W7800 uses GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 5090 uses GDDR7 with a 512-bit bus and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their compute capabilities differ?

A: The RTX 5090 has 21,760 shading units and 680 tensor cores, compared to the W7800's 4,480 shading units and no tensor cores. The RTX 5090 also has 170 RT cores versus 70 on the W7800.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two GPUs?

A: The RTX 5090's GB202 chip contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, while the W7800's Navi 31 has 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die.

Q: Which card has better average benchmark positioning relative to its rivals?

A: The W7800 sits at the 97th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 164,894, while the RTX 5090 is at the 92nd percentile with an average score of 79,842, though the RTX 5090's average is heavily influenced by its passmark results.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito and a 5 nm TSMC process. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 uses the GB202 chip on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also on a 5 nm TSMC process. Both foundries are TSMC, but the transistor implementations diverge sharply.

The W7800 packs 57,700 million transistors into a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1 million per square millimeter. The RTX 5090 crams 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, achieving 122.9 million per square millimeter. That higher density reflects NVIDIA's more complex logic blocks, including dedicated tensor cores and a much larger array of RT cores.

Clock behavior differs meaningfully. The W7800 has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost clock of 2525 MHz. The RTX 5090 starts at 2017 MHz base but boosts to 2407 MHz, slightly lower than the AMD part's peak. Memory clocks also differ: the W7800 runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective GDDR6, while the RTX 5090 runs at 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective GDDR7.

The compute architecture shows the largest divergence. The W7800 has 4,480 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The RTX 5090 has 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. NVIDIA's card also includes 680 tensor cores and 170 RT cores, while AMD's card has 70 RT cores and no tensor core equivalent listed. FP32 throughput tells the story: the RTX 5090 delivers 104.8 TFLOPS versus 45.25 TFLOPS for the W7800, more than double. FP16 performance is identical to FP32 on the RTX 5090 at 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1), while the W7800 reaches 90.50 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

Memory bandwidth is a major architectural separation point. The W7800 uses a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5090 uses a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, roughly three times the bandwidth of the AMD card. Pixel rates follow: 323.2 GPixel/s for the W7800 and 423.6 GPixel/s for the RTX 5090. Texture rates are 707.0 GTexel/s versus 1,636.8 GTexel/s respectively.

Power and interface differences are equally pronounced. The W7800 draws 260 W TDP with dual 8-pin connectors and a suggested 600 W PSU. The RTX 5090 draws 575 W TDP with a single 16-pin connector and a suggested 950 W PSU. The W7800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RTX 5090 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the W7800 offers three DisplayPort 2.1 and one mini-DisplayPort 2.1, while the RTX 5090 offers one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct head-to-head comparisons between these cards, and both go decisively to the RTX 5090. In Geekbench OpenCL, the W7800 scores 154,366 against the RTX 5090's 334,370. The delta of 53.8% means the RTX 5090 nearly doubles the AMD card's raw compute throughput in this test. This aligns with the shading unit and FP32 differences, though the gap is slightly smaller than the 2.3x shading unit ratio might suggest, indicating that AMD's RDNA 3.0 architecture extracts more per-shader efficiency in OpenCL workloads.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the W7800 improves to 175,422, but the RTX 5090 jumps to 376,728. The 53.4% delta is nearly identical to the OpenCL result. The W7800's Vulkan score is 13.6% higher than its own OpenCL score, suggesting that AMD's driver stack handles Vulkan slightly better. The RTX 5090's Vulkan score is 12.7% higher than its OpenCL score, showing a similar pattern. Both cards benefit from Vulkan's lower overhead, but the relative gap remains constant.

The RTX 5090's benchmark portfolio extends far beyond these two tests. It records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18,355, a Passmark G3D score of 39,650, and a Passmark GPU compute score of 26,756. It also posts Passmark DirectX scores of 226 for DX10, 341 for DX11, 185 for DX12, and 395 for DX9, plus a G2D score of 1,413. These additional data points show the RTX 5090 as a versatile performer across legacy and modern APIs, though the W7800 lacks comparable entries in the database for those specific tests.

The W7800's nearest rivals provide context for its position. It sits just 0.2% below the NVIDIA RTX A5500's average score of 165,217, 0.7% below the RTX 4500 Ada Generation's 166,094, and 2.2% below the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X's 168,574. It beats the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB by 1.5%. The RTX 5090's nearest rivals are older or different-class products: the Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB sits 0.3% below, the Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB sits 0.6% below, and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT sits 1.1% below, while the Radeon Pro Vega 64X is 1.4% higher.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for compute-heavy workloads. The RTX 5090 dominates the W7800 in both available head-to-head benchmarks, with leads of 53.8% in OpenCL and 53.4% in Vulkan. Its FP32 throughput of 104.8 TFLOPS is more than double the W7800's 45.25 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s is roughly three times the W7800's 576.0 GB/s. For any application that scales with raw compute or memory bandwidth, the RTX 5090 is the stronger choice.

The W7800 is not without merit. It holds the 97th percentile among all GPUs, higher than the RTX 5090's 92nd percentile, and its average benchmark score of 164,894 exceeds the RTX 5090's 79,842. That average, however, is skewed by the RTX 5090's low Passmark scores, which appear to penalize the card heavily. The W7800's 260 W TDP is less than half the RTX 5090's 575 W, making it far more power-efficient per watt. Its dual 8-pin connectors and 600 W suggested PSU are more accommodating for existing systems.

For workstation users who prioritize compute density and power efficiency, the W7800 offers a compelling profile. For users who need maximum performance, the RTX 5090's benchmark dominance is unambiguous. The RTX 5090 also carries a launch MSRP of 1,999 USD, while the W7800 has a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD, making the NVIDIA card the higher-performance option at a lower launch price.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7800 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 |

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

| Chip | Navi 31 | GB202 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | 92,200 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 750 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 109.1M / mm² | 122.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1895 MHz | 2017 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2525 MHz | 2407 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 28 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 512 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 1.79 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 4480 | 21760 |

| TMUs | 280 | 680 |

| ROPs | 128 | 176 |

| RT Cores | 70 | 170 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 680 |

| Pixel Rate | 323.2 GPixel/s | 423.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 707.0 GTexel/s | 1,636.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 45.25 TFLOPS | 104.8 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) | 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 260 W | 575 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 950 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 3x DP 2.1, 1x mini-DP 2.1 | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DP 2.1b |

| Length | 280 mm (11 inches) | 304 mm (12 inches) |

| Height | 110 mm (4.3 inches) | 137 mm (5.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2023-04-12 | 2025-01-29 |

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 wins in raw compute benchmarks. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are both more than double the W7800's, and its FP32 throughput of 104.8 TFLOPS positions it as a clear leader for number-crunching workloads. The 512-bit memory bus and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth make it suited for large dataset operations, while 680 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI acceleration that the W7800 lacks entirely. The 170 RT cores versus 70 on the W7800 also give it an edge in ray-traced rendering tasks.

The W7800 wins on efficiency and integration. Its 260 W TDP versus 575 W means substantially lower power draw, and its 600 W suggested PSU requirement is far more modest than the RTX 5090's 950 W. The dual 8-pin connectors are more universally compatible with existing power supplies than the RTX 5090's single 16-pin connector. Its 280 mm length and 110 mm height make it easier to fit into compact workstation chassis compared to the RTX 5090's 304 mm length and 137 mm height. The W7800's 97th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its competitive positioning against the RTX A5500 and RTX 4500 Ada Generation show that it holds its own in the professional GPU space.

For memory-bound workloads, the W7800's 576.0 GB/s bandwidth is respectable but the RTX 5090's 1.79 TB/s is in another class. For power-constrained environments, the W7800's lower TDP and PSU requirements make it the more practical choice. The RTX 5090's PCIe 5.0 interface provides double the bandwidth of the W7800's PCIe 4.0, which matters for data transfer heavy applications. The W7800's additional mini-DisplayPort output may appeal to certain multi-monitor setups, while the RTX 5090's HDMI 2.1b output supports direct display connectivity without adapters.