AMD Radeon PRO W7800 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark database splits these two cards cleanly along generational and architectural lines. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, and the margin is not subtle. In OpenCL, the W7800 delivers 154366 points against 66696 for the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, a 131.4% advantage. In Vulkan, the gap is similar: 175422 versus 77499, a 126.4% lead. On raw compute workloads, this is a decisive sweep.

The W7800 occupies the top tier of the database with a 97th percentile ranking across all GPUs, while the TITAN X Pascal sits at the 91st percentile. That percentile difference matters: the W7800 is not merely faster, it is positioned among the fastest accelerators ever recorded, whereas the TITAN X Pascal, while still respectable, sits firmly in the upper-middle range of historical data.

The use-case split is straightforward. The W7800 is the choice for modern compute-heavy workloads, particularly those that leverage Vulkan and OpenCL with large memory footprints. Its 32 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth is built for datasets that would exhaust smaller cards. The TITAN X Pascal, with 12 GB GDDR5X and 480.4 GB/s, remains viable for older or lighter tasks, but its 10.97 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is less than a quarter of the W7800's 45.25 TFLOPS. For anyone running current generation rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference, the recorded data points squarely at AMD.

However, the TITAN X Pascal is not without a niche. Its 1:64 FP16 ratio (171.5 GFLOPS) means it is not designed for half-precision work, but its Pascal architecture still handles DirectX 12 (12_1) titles and OpenGL 4.6 applications competently. For legacy compatibility, DVI output, or simply a lower power draw at 250 W versus 260 W, the older card retains some utility. Yet in every measured benchmark, the W7800 wins by more than double.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two is vast. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 uses the Navi 31 chip, built on TSMC's 5 nm process, with 57,700 million transistors packed into a 529 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 109.1 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip on TSMC's 16 nm process, with 11,800 million transistors across 471 mm², for a density of 25.1 million per square millimeter. The density difference, 4.3 times in AMD's favor, explains much of the performance gap.

The W7800 is RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Plum Bonito, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. It includes 4480 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores. It does not list tensor cores, but its FP16 throughput of 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) shows a deliberate focus on half-precision compute. The TITAN X Pascal, by contrast, is Pascal architecture from the GeForce 10 generation, with 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores or tensor cores at all. Its FP16 rate of 171.5 GFLOPS at 1:64 is a legacy afterthought.

Memory subsystems differ as much as the compute cores. The W7800 pairs 32 GB GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN X Pascal uses 12 GB GDDR5X on a wider 384 bit bus, but its 480.4 GB/s bandwidth is still 20% lower. The W7800 also runs far higher clocks: 1895 MHz base and 2525 MHz boost versus 1417 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost. Those clocks, combined with the newer architecture, produce a pixel rate of 323.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 707.0 GTexel/s, compared to 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s for the older card.

API support also separates them. The W7800 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The TITAN X Pascal supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both share OpenGL and Vulkan versions, but the W7800's newer DirectX feature level matters for modern titles and compute workloads. The W7800 also uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the TITAN X Pascal is stuck on PCIe 3.0 x16, halving available host bandwidth for data transfers.

Physical and power characteristics are close but not identical. Both are dual-slot cards, 40 mm wide. The W7800 is 280 mm long and 110 mm tall; the TITAN X Pascal is 267 mm long and 112 mm tall. The W7800 draws 260 W with 2x 8-pin connectors; the TITAN X Pascal draws 250 W with 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin. Both recommend a 600 W power supply. The W7800 offers three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs plus one mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The TITAN X Pascal offers one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data is unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 scores 154366 against the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal's 66696. That is a delta of 131.4%, meaning the W7800 is roughly 2.3 times faster. In Geekbench Vulkan, the W7800 scores 175422 against 77499, a delta of 126.4%. The W7800 wins both tests, giving it a 2-0 record in the database.

Context from the nearest rival lists reinforces how dominant the W7800 is. Its average benchmark score is 164894, putting it just 0.2% below the NVIDIA RTX A5500 (165217) and 0.7% below the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation (166094). It is 1.5% above the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (162504) and 2.2% below the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X (168574). In short, the W7800 trades blows with professional cards that cost far more and draw more power, while leaving the TITAN X Pascal far behind.

The TITAN X Pascal's average score is 72098, with nearest rivals including the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 at 72379 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6650M at 71768 (0.5% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE at 70829 (1.8% lower). It also sits 1.7% below the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition at 73370. This places the TITAN X Pascal in a performance tier occupied by midrange mobile and desktop Radeon parts from several generations later, a stark illustration of how far GPU compute has advanced since 2016.

The largest single win for the W7800 is the OpenCL test, where its 131.4% delta exceeds the 126.4% Vulkan delta. Both margins are massive, but the OpenCL gap hints that the W7800's raw FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth are particularly well suited to that API's compute patterns. The Vulkan result, while slightly narrower, still shows the W7800 delivering more than double the TITAN X Pascal's score.

For the TITAN X Pascal, there is no recorded benchmark where it beats the W7800. The wins column is zero. The only consolation is that its 91st percentile ranking still places it above most historical GPUs, but against this particular AMD competitor, the data shows no path to victory.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves no room for ambiguity. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the superior card for compute workloads, winning both head-to-head benchmarks by margins exceeding 126%. Its 32 GB GDDR6 memory, 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, 45.25 TFLOPS FP32, and 90.50 TFLOPS FP16 make it a professional-grade accelerator suited for modern rendering, simulation, and half-precision compute. Its 97th percentile ranking places it among the top 3% of all GPUs in the database.

The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, despite its 91st percentile ranking, is a legacy product. Its 12 GB GDDR5X and 10.97 TFLOPS FP32 are roughly one quarter of the W7800's compute throughput. It offers no ray tracing cores, no tensor cores, and only a 1:64 FP16 ratio, making it unsuitable for modern half-precision workloads. Its PCIe 3.0 interface and DirectX 12 (12_1) support further date it. The card is end-of-life, while the W7800 remains in active production.

Who should pick which? From the data alone, anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan compute workloads, particularly with large datasets or ray tracing requirements, should choose the W7800. Its double-digit TFLOPS advantage and four times the memory capacity are decisive. The TITAN X Pascal is only sensible for users with legacy software that specifically requires Pascal-era quirks, a DVI output, or who need to save 10 W of power. Even then, the performance gap is so large that the W7800 is the only defensible choice for new purchases.

The W7800's launch MSRP is 2,499 USD. The TITAN X Pascal's launch MSRP was 1,199 USD. Those are historical facts, not commentary on current market value, and the database does not track street prices.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 has 576.0 GB/s, while the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal has 480.4 GB/s.

Q: Does the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal support ray tracing?

A: No. The TITAN X Pascal lists no ray tracing cores, while the W7800 includes 70 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The W7800 delivers 45.25 TFLOPS FP32, while the TITAN X Pascal delivers 10.97 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 4.1 times.

Q: Which card has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The W7800 ranks at the 97th percentile across all GPUs, while the TITAN X Pascal ranks at the 91st percentile.

Q: Are both cards dual-slot designs?

A: Yes, both are dual-slot, and both are 40 mm wide. The W7800 is 280 mm long and 110 mm tall; the TITAN X Pascal is 267 mm long and 112 mm tall.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

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