AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 and NVIDIA B200 SXM6 serve entirely different segments of the GPU market, and the recorded data makes that division clear. The W7900 is a workstation card with display outputs, a triple-slot cooler, and a 295 W power target, aimed at rendering and compute workloads that require visual output. The B200 SXM6 is a server module with no display outputs, a 1000 W power target, and a 1400 W suggested PSU, built for datacenter-scale compute. The benchmark database contains measured scores for the W7900 but none for the B200, which means the B200 cannot be ranked against the W7900 in the standard average benchmark score metric. The W7900 holds a percentile rank of 94 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 110725, while the B200 sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0 due to the absence of recorded benchmarks.

The W7900 wins on any test that requires a physical display connection. It provides 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for interactive graphics workloads, CAD, and visualization. The B200 lists no APIs and no display outputs, so it cannot drive a monitor or run the same client-side graphics stacks. The W7900 also wins on raw pixel throughput with a pixel rate of 479.0 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s for the B200, a difference of more than 10x. That gap reflects the B200's focus on tensor and compute throughput rather than rasterization.

The B200 wins on memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and compute density. It has 180 GB of HBM3e memory versus 48 GB of GDDR6 on the W7900, and its memory bandwidth of 8.19 TB/s is roughly 9.5x higher than the W7900's 864.0 GB/s. The B200 also has a higher FP32 throughput at 69.34 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS, and a higher FP16 throughput at 69.34 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS. The B200 includes 592 tensor cores, while the W7900 lists no tensor core count, indicating that the B200 is the only one of the two with dedicated tensor hardware. The B200 is also a newer product, released on 2024-10-31 versus 2023-05-25 for the W7900.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on the same 5 nm TSMC process node, but they diverge sharply in every other architectural aspect. The W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture and the Plum Bonito codename, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The B200 uses the GB100 chip with Blackwell architecture, part of the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. The transistor counts differ by a factor of roughly 3.6: the W7900 has 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, while the B200 has 208,000 million transistors on a 1628 mm² die. The transistor density is also higher on the B200 at 127.8M per mm² versus 109.1M per mm² for the W7900.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The W7900 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the B200 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth. The B200's memory bus is 21.3x wider than the W7900's, which directly explains its enormous bandwidth advantage. The W7900's memory clock is listed at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the B200's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective; the B200 compensates for the lower per-pin speed with far more pins.

Shader and fixed-function hardware also differ. The W7900 has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores. The B200 has 18944 shading units, 592 TMUs, but only 24 ROPs and no listed ray tracing cores. The B200 instead has 592 tensor cores. The B200's texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s exceeds the W7900's 958.1 GTexel/s, but its pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s is far below the W7900's 479.0 GPixel/s. The B200's low ROP count and pixel rate confirm that it is not designed for rasterized graphics output.

Clock behavior also differs significantly. The W7900 has a base clock of 1760 MHz and a boost clock of 2495 MHz. The B200 has a base clock of just 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1830 MHz. The B200's extremely low base clock suggests a design that relies on boost behavior under server cooling conditions, while the W7900 runs closer to a constant high clock. The W7900 is PCIe 4.0 x16, while the B200 uses PCIe 6.0 x16, giving the B200 a newer host interface.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the W7900 and the B200, and the B200 has no recorded benchmark scores at all. The only comparable data points come from the W7900's own benchmark results and its nearest rival list. The W7900 scores 84379 in Geekbench OpenCL and 137070 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 110725, placing it in the 94th percentile among all GPUs.

Without B200 scores, the comparison must rely on the W7900's position relative to its nearest rivals. The W7900 is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (average score 109617), 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (average score 107342), 2.8% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (average score 113944), and 3.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (average score 114395). These deltas show that the W7900 sits in a tight band around 110000 average score, within roughly 3 percentage points of all four rivals. The B200 cannot be placed in this ranking because it has no average score.

The FP32 and FP16 figures provide the only direct compute comparison between the two cards. The B200's 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 is 13.1% higher than the W7900's 61.32 TFLOPS. The B200's 69.34 TFLOPS FP16 is likewise 13.1% higher than the W7900's 61.32 TFLOPS. Both cards run FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so neither has a separate boosted FP16 path. The B200's advantage in compute throughput is real but modest in raw TFLOPS terms; its larger advantage lies in memory bandwidth and tensor capability, not in raw shader math.

The pixel rate comparison is stark. The W7900's 479.0 GPixel/s is 10.9x higher than the B200's 43.92 GPixel/s. The texture rate comparison is closer: the B200's 1,083.4 GTexel/s is 13.1% higher than the W7900's 958.1 GTexel/s. This combination, high texture rate with low pixel rate, further confirms the B200's server compute orientation. Memory bandwidth favors the B200 by a factor of 9.5, with 8.19 TB/s versus 864.0 GB/s.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the only one of the two that can function as a traditional workstation GPU. It has display outputs, full graphics API support, a high pixel rate, and a conventional triple-slot form factor with 2x 8-pin power connectors. Its 295 W TDP and 600 W suggested PSU make it feasible for a single workstation chassis. The W7900 has actual benchmark scores in the database, a 94th percentile rank, and an average score of 110725, so it can be compared against other GPUs in the same class.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a server compute module with no display outputs, no graphics APIs, and no recorded benchmarks. It uses an SXM module form factor, draws 1000 W, and requires a 1400 W suggested PSU. Its 180 GB of HBM3e memory and 8.19 TB/s bandwidth target large model inference and training workloads, not interactive graphics. The B200 has 592 tensor cores, which the W7900 lacks entirely, and its 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 throughput edges out the W7900's 61.32 TFLOPS in both precisions.

Who should pick which depends strictly on workload. A user with a monitor, a desktop PCIe slot, and a need for DirectX or Vulkan rendering should choose the W7900, because the B200 cannot output video or run those APIs. A datacenter operator with a server platform that accepts SXM modules and a workload that needs 180 GB of memory, 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth, or tensor cores should choose the B200, because the W7900 offers only 48 GB, 864.0 GB/s, and no tensor cores. The B200 also has a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface versus the W7900's PCIe 4.0 x16, which matters for host transfer rates in server environments.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, which is 13.1% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7900's 61.32 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 support display output?

A: Yes. The W7900 has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no display outputs.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 592 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 lists no tensor core count.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has a 295 W TDP and a 600 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP and a 1400 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has 8.19 TB/s of memory bandwidth, which is about 9.5x higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7900's 864.0 GB/s.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon PRO W7900 | NVIDIA B200 SXM6 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell |

| Chip | Navi 31 | GB100 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | 208,000 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 1628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 109.1M / mm² | 127.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1760 MHz | 120 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2495 MHz | 1830 MHz |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 180 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM3e |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 8192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 864.0 GB/s | 8.19 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 6144 | 18944 |

| TMUs | 384 | 592 |

| ROPs | 192 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 96 | None listed |

| Tensor Cores | None listed | 592 |

| Pixel Rate | 479.0 GPixel/s | 43.92 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 958.1 GTexel/s | 1,083.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.32 TFLOPS | 69.34 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) | 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 295 W | 1000 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | SXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None listed |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 1400 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 | 2023-05-25 | 2024-10-31 |

| Predecessor | Radeon Pro Vega | Server Hopper |

| Successor | None listed | Server Rubin |

| Launch MSRP | 3,999 USD | 34,999 USD |