AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs NVIDIA H200 NVL Comparison

The NVIDIA H200 NVL and AMD Radeon PRO W7800 occupy vastly different corners of the GPU landscape, and the benchmark data confirms this is not a contest of equals. The single head-to-head result available shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA server part, but the story is more nuanced when examining each card’s position within its own competitive set. The H200 NVL is built for massive compute throughput, while the W7800 is a professional workstation card with display outputs and a more modest footprint. The data available reveals a clear performance hierarchy, yet both products serve distinct purposes that the raw numbers alone do not fully capture.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is stark. The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334,891 points, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 manages 154,366 points. This translates to a delta of 116.9% in favor of the NVIDIA card — meaning the H200 NVL more than doubles the W7800’s score in this compute-oriented workload. No other benchmark results are shared between the two, so this single data point must carry the weight of the head-to-head comparison. The magnitude of this gap is not merely incremental; it represents a fundamental difference in compute capacity, with the H200 NVL delivering over two times the raw OpenCL performance of the AMD card.

Looking at the broader context, the H200 NVL’s score positions it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs, indicating it sits at the very top of the performance distribution. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA B200, scores 345,482, which is 3.1% higher, while the AMD Instinct MI300X trails by 5.3% with a score of 317,994. The H200 NVL also leads the NVIDIA L40S by a substantial 13.2% margin. In contrast, the W7800’s 154,366 OpenCL score places it at the 97th percentile, and its nearest rivals are far closer in performance. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 is just 0.2% behind, the RTX 4500 Ada Generation is 0.7% ahead, and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X leads by 2.2%. This comparison shows that while the W7800 is competitive within its workstation class, it operates in an entirely different performance tier from the H200 NVL.

The Vulkan benchmark, available only for the W7800, shows a score of 175,422, which is notably higher than its OpenCL result. This suggests the AMD card has stronger graphics-oriented performance relative to its compute capabilities, though no comparable Vulkan data exists for the H200 NVL. The absence of any Vulkan or DirectX support for the NVIDIA card, as indicated by the API fields, reinforces that it is not designed for graphics workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The H200 NVL wins decisively in raw compute performance, as evidenced by its OpenCL score of 334,891 versus the W7800’s 154,366. This advantage is compounded by its memory subsystem: the H200 NVL offers 141 GB of HBM3e memory with a 6144-bit bus and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth, compared to the W7800’s 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. For workloads that are memory-bound — such as large language model inference, scientific simulations, or data processing — the H200 NVL’s capacity and bandwidth are in a different league. The shading unit count also favors NVIDIA: 16,896 versus 4,480, and the FP32 throughput of 60.32 TFLOPS versus 45.25 TFLOPS further cements the compute lead.

The W7800 wins in areas that the H200 NVL does not even attempt to address. It has display outputs — 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 — while the H200 NVL has none. The W7800 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the H200 NVL lists N/A for all three APIs. For tasks like 3D rendering, real-time visualization, or any workload requiring a graphical output, the W7800 is the only viable option of the two. Its pixel rate of 323.2 GPixel/s is also far higher than the H200 NVL’s 42.84 GPixel/s, suggesting the AMD card is optimized for rasterization-heavy tasks. The W7800’s ray tracing cores, numbered at 70, provide hardware acceleration that the H200 NVL lacks entirely, as its RT core field is null.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA H200 NVL than the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 in OpenCL?

A: The H200 NVL scores 334,891 compared to the W7800’s 154,366, resulting in a 116.9% performance advantage. This means the NVIDIA card delivers more than double the OpenCL compute performance.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The H200 NVL offers 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth from its HBM3e memory, while the W7800 provides 576.0 GB/s from GDDR6. The NVIDIA card’s bandwidth is approximately 8.5 times higher.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 support display outputs?

A: Yes, the W7800 has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The NVIDIA H200 NVL has no display outputs at all, making it unsuitable for direct graphics display.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The H200 NVL has an average benchmark score of 334,891 (based on its single OpenCL result), while the W7800 averages 164,894 across its OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 154,366 and 175,422, respectively.

Q: How does each GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The H200 NVL is 3.1% behind the NVIDIA B200, 5.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X, and 13.2% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S. The W7800 is 0.2% behind the RTX A5500, 0.7% behind the RTX 4500 Ada Generation, and 2.2% behind the Radeon Pro W6900X.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The W7800 has a transistor density of 109.1M per mm², which is higher than the H200 NVL’s 98.3M per mm². However, the H200 NVL has more total transistors at 80,000 million versus 57,700 million.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. Memory capacity is one of the most significant gaps: the H200 NVL has 141 GB of HBM3e, while the W7800 has 32 GB of GDDR6. Bus width follows suit, with the NVIDIA card using a 6144-bit interface versus the AMD card’s 256-bit. Memory bandwidth is 4.89 TB/s for NVIDIA and 576.0 GB/s for AMD. Clock speeds also differ, with the H200 NVL running at 1365 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, while the W7800 runs at 1895 MHz base and 2525 MHz boost — the AMD card has higher clock speeds, but this does not compensate for the massive compute core count difference.

The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, while the W7800 has 4,480 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The W7800 has 70 ray tracing cores, while the H200 NVL has none listed. The NVIDIA card has 528 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. Power consumption differs significantly: the H200 NVL is rated at 600 W with a suggested PSU of 1000 W, while the W7800 is rated at 260 W with a suggested PSU of 600 W. The H200 NVL uses a single 8-pin EPS connector, whereas the W7800 uses two 8-pin connectors. The bus interface also differs, with PCIe 5.0 x16 on NVIDIA versus PCIe 4.0 x16 on AMD. Physical dimensions are similar in length and height, but the W7800 has a specified width of 40 mm (1.6 inches) while the H200 NVL’s width is not listed.

Architecture Differences

The H200 NVL is built on NVIDIA’s Hopper architecture using the GH100 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The W7800 uses AMD’s RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, codenamed “Plum Bonito,” also on a 5 nm TSMC process. The generation names reflect their different lineages: the H200 NVL belongs to the Server Hopper (Hxx) series, while the W7800 is part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). The H200 NVL’s predecessor is Server Ada, and its successor is Server Blackwell, indicating a clear evolutionary path in NVIDIA’s data center lineup. The W7800’s predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega, with no successor listed.

Transistor counts and die sizes reveal the scale of each chip. The H200 NVL packs 80,000 million transistors into an 814 mm² die, while the W7800 fits 57,700 million into a 529 mm² die. Despite the smaller die, the W7800 achieves a higher transistor density at 109.1M per mm² versus 98.3M per mm². The H200 NVL includes tensor cores (528) for AI acceleration, a feature absent from the W7800. The W7800 includes ray tracing cores (70), which the H200 NVL does not have. The H200 NVL supports no graphics APIs (DirectX, OpenGL, Vulkan all N/A), while the W7800 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates also differ: the H200 NVL launched on November 17, 2024, while the W7800 launched on April 12, 2023.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload requirements. The NVIDIA H200 NVL is the overwhelming choice for pure compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 334,891 places it at the 100th percentile, and its 141 GB of HBM3e memory with 4.89 TB/s bandwidth makes it suitable for large-scale AI training, scientific computing, and data-intensive tasks. The 116.9% performance lead over the W7800 in OpenCL is the single most decisive statistic in this comparison. Anyone needing maximum compute throughput, tensor core acceleration, or massive memory capacity should select the H200 NVL without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the appropriate pick for professional graphics workstations. Its display outputs, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility make it a functional graphics card, which the H200 NVL is not. The W7800’s 70 ray tracing cores and higher pixel rate (323.2 GPixel/s versus 42.84 GPixel/s) indicate it is designed for rendering and visualization tasks. Its 32 GB of GDDR6 memory is sufficient for many professional workloads, and its 260 W power draw is far more manageable than the H200 NVL’s 600 W requirement. The W7800 also sits competitively among its peers, with its nearest rival, the RTX 4500 Ada Generation, only 0.7% ahead. For users who need a GPU that can drive multiple 4K displays and handle 3D content creation, the W7800 is the only sensible option between these two cards.

The verdict is not about which GPU is better overall, but which is better for a specific use case. The H200 NVL excels in server environments where compute density and memory capacity are paramount, while the W7800 serves workstation users who require graphics output and API support. The benchmark data unequivocally shows the H200 NVL as the superior compute performer, but the W7800’s feature set addresses needs that the NVIDIA card simply cannot meet. Choose based on whether the priority is raw compute or functional graphics capability.