AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 and NVIDIA Rubin GPU occupy entirely different segments of the hardware landscape. The Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation-focused graphics card with an active production status and a release date of April 12, 2023. It has recorded benchmark scores in two tests: Geekbench OpenCL at 154,366 and Geekbench Vulkan at 175,422. Its average benchmark score of 164,894 places it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database. This indicates that the W7800 is a high-performing workstation part, competitive with other professional cards such as the NVIDIA RTX A5500, which scores an average of 165,217, a delta of -0.2% relative to the W7800. The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation scores 166,094, a delta of -0.7%, while the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X scores 168,574, a delta of -2.2%. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB scores 162,504, a delta of +1.5%, meaning the W7800 slightly trails that particular accelerator.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU, in contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores. Its average benchmark score is 0, and it sits at the 50th percentile. There are no nearest rivals listed for the Rubin GPU. This absence of data means the Rubin GPU cannot be positioned against other parts through measured performance. The Rubin GPU is a server-class component, described as a Server Rubin (Rxx) generation part, with a release date of December 31, 2025. It has no display outputs, no DirectX support, no OpenGL support, and no Vulkan support. The Radeon PRO W7800, by comparison, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it offers three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs plus one mini-DisplayPort 2.1 output.

The wins are clear from the available data. The Radeon PRO W7800 wins on any measurable benchmark criterion because it has recorded scores and the Rubin GPU does not. The Rubin GPU wins on raw specification scale, but without benchmarks, those specifications cannot be translated into comparative performance figures. The database records zero wins for either part in head-to-head benchmarks, as no direct comparison tests exist.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share a foundry, TSMC, but diverge sharply on process node and chip design. The Radeon PRO W7800 uses a 5 nm process, while the Rubin GPU uses a 3 nm process. The W7800 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Rubin GPU is built on the Rubin architecture with the GR100 chip and belongs to the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation.

The transistor counts differ by an enormous margin. The W7800 contains 57,700 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², yielding a transistor density of 109.1 million per mm². The Rubin GPU contains 336,000 million transistors on a die size of 1,456 mm², yielding a transistor density of 230.8 million per mm². That is nearly six times the transistor count and a die area roughly 2.75 times larger.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The W7800 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16,384-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 22.1 TB/s. The bus width is 64 times larger, and the bandwidth is roughly 38 times higher. The memory clock differs as well: the W7800 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the Rubin GPU runs at 2695 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective).

Compute resources are structured differently. The W7800 has 4,480 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores. The Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. It has 896 tensor cores but no listed ray tracing cores. The W7800's pixel rate is 323.2 GPixel/s, while the Rubin GPU's is 54.41 GPixel/s, a substantial difference in favor of the W7800. The texture rate favors the Rubin GPU: 2,031.2 GTexel/s versus 707.0 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds also vary. The W7800 has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost clock of 2525 MHz. The Rubin GPU has a base clock of 700 MHz and a boost clock of 2267 MHz. The W7800's base clock is significantly higher, though the boost clocks are closer.

The interface differs as well. The W7800 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Rubin GPU uses PCIe 6.0 x16. Power requirements are dramatically different. The W7800 has a TDP of 260 W, uses two 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 600 W. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W, lists no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 2700 W. The W7800 is a dual-slot card measuring 280 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The Rubin GPU is an SXM Module with no listed dimensions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark results exist in the database for these two parts. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, and the headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. This is expected, as the two GPUs serve different markets and were released at different times. The Radeon PRO W7800 has been on the market since April 12, 2023, and has accumulated benchmark data. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has a release date of December 31, 2025, and has no recorded benchmarks.

The only benchmark figures available for the W7800 are its Geekbench scores. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 154,366. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 175,422. The average of these two scores is 164,894. Comparing this to its nearest rivals shows a tight cluster. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 averages 165,217, which is 0.2% higher than the W7800. The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation averages 166,094, which is 0.7% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro W6900X averages 168,574, which is 2.2% higher. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB averages 162,504, which is 1.5% lower than the W7800. These deltas indicate that the W7800 sits near the middle of its performance neighborhood, slightly below three of its four nearest rivals and slightly above one.

For the Rubin GPU, the database shows no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals. Its percentile rank of 50 reflects the absence of measured data, as it cannot be ranked against any tested GPU. Any comparison between the two parts based on measured performance is therefore impossible. The Rubin GPU's specifications indicate far larger compute resources, but those specifications have not been validated through benchmarks in this database.

FAQ

Q: Does the NVIDIA Rubin GPU have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Rubin GPU has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: How does the Radeon PRO W7800 compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX A5500?

A: The W7800 has an average benchmark score of 164,894, while the RTX A5500 has an average score of 165,217. The RTX A5500 is 0.2% higher.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Radeon PRO W7800 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16,384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units, while the Radeon PRO W7800 has 4,480 shading units.

Q: Does the Rubin GPU support display outputs or graphics APIs?

A: No. The Rubin GPU has no display outputs and lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A. The W7800 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Radeon PRO W7800 has a TDP of 260 W and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The Rubin GPU has a TDP of 2300 W and a suggested PSU of 2700 W.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two GPUs should not be compared as direct alternatives. The Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation graphics card with measurable performance, a 97th percentile ranking, and support for standard graphics APIs and display outputs. It is suitable for tasks that require OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration, as shown by its Geekbench scores. Its nearest rivals are all professional workstation or accelerator GPUs, and its average score sits within a narrow band of those parts.

The NVIDIA Rubin GPU is a server accelerator with no display outputs, no graphics API support, and no benchmark data. It is designed for compute workloads, as indicated by its 896 tensor cores, 288 GB of HBM4 memory, and 22.1 TB/s bandwidth. Its lack of any recorded benchmark score means the database cannot confirm its real-world performance. The Rubin GPU's specifications suggest enormous compute capability, but those specifications remain unvalidated by measured results.

Users requiring a workstation GPU with proven OpenCL and Vulkan performance, display outputs, and a 97th percentile ranking should consider the Radeon PRO W7800. Users requiring a high-bandwidth server accelerator with tensor cores and a 3 nm process node should consider the Rubin GPU, but they should be aware that no benchmark data exists in the database to confirm its performance relative to other parts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7800 | NVIDIA Rubin GPU |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Rubin |

| Chip | Navi 31 | GR100 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 3 nm |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | 336,000 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 1456 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 109.1M / mm² | 230.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1895 MHz | 700 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2525 MHz | 2267 MHz |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 288 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM4 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 16384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 22.1 TB/s |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 2695 MHz, 10.8 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 4480 | 28672 |

| TMUs | 280 | 896 |

| ROPs | 128 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 70 | Not listed |

| Tensor Cores | Not listed | 896 |

| Pixel Rate | 323.2 GPixel/s | 54.41 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 707.0 GTexel/s | 2,031.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 45.25 TFLOPS | 130.0 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1) | 260.0 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 260 W | 2300 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 2700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 6.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2023-04-12 | 2025-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,499 USD | Not listed |