AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE occupy different positions in the database. The W7900 is a professional workstation card with a recorded average benchmark score of 110725, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX 5090 SE, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile. The data clearly shows that the W7900 is the only one of the two with measurable performance data available.

For users requiring immediate, verified performance metrics, the W7900 delivers. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 84379 and Vulkan score of 137070 provide concrete reference points. The RTX 5090 SE offers no such data, so any performance assessment of that card is impossible from the recorded information. The W7900 also carries a significantly larger memory capacity at 48 GB versus 24 GB, which matters for workloads that exceed the RTX 5090 SE's capacity.

The RTX 5090 SE does have structural advantages in the raw specifications. It uses more shading units (14080 versus 6144), more texture mapping units (440 versus 384), more RT cores (110 versus 96), and includes 440 tensor cores that the W7900 lacks entirely. Its FP32 throughput is higher at 66.94 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS. However, without benchmark data, these advantages remain theoretical.

The launch MSRP for the W7900 is 3,999 USD. The RTX 5090 SE has a launch MSRP of 1,499 USD. The database shows the W7900 as a mature, active product with a predecessor (Radeon Pro Vega) and a release date in 2023. The RTX 5090 SE is also active, with a release date at the end of 2025, a predecessor in GeForce 40, and a successor in GeForce 60.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation, specifically the Navi III Series. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE uses the GB202 chip based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the GeForce 50-series and the GeForce 50 generation.

Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The transistor counts differ substantially: the W7900 packs 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 109.1 million per square millimeter. The RTX 5090 SE contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, with a density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The RTX 5090 SE's die is larger and denser, though the W7900 still holds a respectable density figure.

Memory architecture diverges clearly. The W7900 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, achieving 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 memory, also on a 384-bit bus, but achieves 1.34 TB/s of bandwidth. The newer GDDR7 standard gives the RTX 5090 SE a bandwidth advantage despite half the capacity.

Clock behavior also differs. The W7900 has a base clock of 1760 MHz and a boost of 2495 MHz, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The RTX 5090 SE has a lower base clock of 1740 MHz and a lower boost of 2377 MHz, but its memory runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The W7900 boosts higher, while the RTX 5090 SE's memory runs faster in effective terms.

Feature sets diverge on tensor cores. The W7900 has no tensor cores listed, while the RTX 5090 SE includes 440. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs differ: the W7900 offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, while the RTX 5090 SE offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory. Both use a 384-bit bus.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RTX 5090 SE delivers 66.94 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 61.32 TFLOPS for the W7900. Both achieve FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The W7900 has a TDP of 295 W and suggests a 600 W power supply, using 2x 8-pin connectors. The RTX 5090 SE has a TDP of 500 W and suggests a 900 W power supply, using a single 16-pin connector.

Q: Which card has better recorded benchmark scores?

A: Only the W7900 has benchmark data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 84379 and its Vulkan score is 137070. The RTX 5090 SE has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of each card?

A: The W7900 measures 280 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 51 mm in width, occupying a triple-slot design. The RTX 5090 SE measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, occupying a dual-slot design.

Q: Which card uses a newer PCIe interface?

A: The RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the W7900 uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the RTX 5090 SE uses GB202 with Blackwell 2.0. The W7900 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation; the RTX 5090 SE belongs to the GeForce 50 generation.

Process nodes match at 5 nm from TSMC, but transistor counts diverge: 57,700 million for the W7900 versus 92,200 million for the RTX 5090 SE. Die sizes are 529 mm² versus 750 mm². Transistor density is 109.1 million per mm² for the W7900 and 122.9 million per mm² for the RTX 5090 SE.

Clock speeds differ: the W7900 runs at 1760 MHz base and 2495 MHz boost, while the RTX 5090 SE runs at 1740 MHz base and 2377 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the W7900 and 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5090 SE.

Memory capacity is 48 GB of GDDR6 for the W7900 versus 24 GB of GDDR7 for the RTX 5090 SE. Bus width is identical at 384 bit, but bandwidth differs: 864.0 GB/s versus 1.34 TB/s.

Compute resources differ significantly. The W7900 has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 RT cores. The RTX 5090 SE has 14080 shading units, 440 TMUs, 160 ROPs, 110 RT cores, and 440 tensor cores. The W7900 has no tensor cores listed.

Pixel and texture rates differ: the W7900 achieves 479.0 GPixel/s and 958.1 GTexel/s, while the RTX 5090 SE achieves 380.3 GPixel/s and 1,045.9 GTexel/s. FP32 output is 61.32 TFLOPS for the W7900 and 66.94 TFLOPS for the RTX 5090 SE.

Power and cooling differ: the W7900 has a 295 W TDP, triple-slot width, and 2x 8-pin connectors. The RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP, dual-slot width, and 1x 16-pin connector. Suggested PSUs are 600 W versus 900 W.

Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x16 for the W7900 versus PCIe 5.0 x16 for the RTX 5090 SE. Display outputs also differ: 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for the W7900, versus 1x HDMI 2.1b plus 3x DisplayPort 2.1b for the RTX 5090 SE.

Physical dimensions differ: the W7900 is 280 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 51 mm wide. The RTX 5090 SE is 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide. Release dates differ: the W7900 launched in 2023, the RTX 5090 SE in 2025.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries comparing the W7900 and RTX 5090 SE directly. The wins counters for both cards are zero. This absence of direct comparison data is itself a significant finding.

What the database does provide are individual benchmark scores for the W7900. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 84379 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 137070 are the only recorded performance measurements for either card. The RTX 5090 SE has no entries in its benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed.

The W7900's nearest rivals provide context for its performance level. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II has an average score of 109617, which is 1% below the W7900's 110725 average. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113944, which is 2.8% higher than the W7900. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X scores 107342, 3.2% lower than the W7900. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB scores 114395, 3.2% higher than the W7900.

These rival comparisons show the W7900 sitting in a narrow band of performance. Its average score of 110725 places it within a few percentage points of all four nearest rivals. The spread from the lowest rival (W6600X at 107342) to the highest (Tesla V100 at 114395) is roughly 6.6 percent, and the W7900 sits near the middle of that range.

The RTX 5090 SE has no benchmark scores and no rivals in the database. Its percentile ranking of 50 versus the W7900's 94 indicates a lack of verified performance data rather than a measured performance level. The database cannot confirm any performance advantage for the RTX 5090 SE, despite its higher theoretical FP32 output.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on recorded data, the W7900 wins in every category where measurements exist. It has a 94th percentile ranking versus 50th for the RTX 5090 SE. Its average benchmark score is 110725 versus 0. It has two individual benchmark scores (OpenCL 84379, Vulkan 137070) while the RTX 5090 SE has none.

The W7900 also wins on memory capacity at 48 GB versus 24 GB. For workloads that require large datasets resident in GPU memory, the W7900's capacity advantage is substantial. The RTX 5090 SE's 24 GB may suffice for many tasks, but the W7900 provides double the headroom.

The W7900 wins on pixel rate at 479.0 GPixel/s versus 380.3 GPixel/s for the RTX 5090 SE. This suggests an advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution rasterization with heavy overdraw.

The RTX 5090 SE wins on several raw specification fronts. It has higher FP32 throughput at 66.94 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS. It has higher texture rate at 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 958.1 GTexel/s. It has more shading units (14080 versus 6144), more TMUs (440 versus 384), more RT cores (110 versus 96), and 440 tensor cores where the W7900 has none.

The RTX 5090 SE wins on memory bandwidth at 1.34 TB/s versus 864.0 GB/s. It uses newer GDDR7 memory versus GDDR6. It has a higher transistor density at 122.9 million per mm² versus 109.1 million per mm².

The RTX 5090 SE wins on power efficiency of form factor: dual-slot versus triple-slot, shorter length at 267 mm versus 280 mm, and thinner at 40 mm versus 51 mm. It has a higher TDP at 500 W versus 295 W, which is a trade-off rather than a clear advantage.

The RTX 5090 SE wins on bus interface with PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. It also offers an HDMI output, which the W7900 lacks entirely.

For tensor-core-dependent workloads such as AI inference and training, the RTX 5090 SE has a structural advantage with 440 tensor cores. The W7900 has no tensor cores at all. However, no benchmark data confirms the magnitude of this advantage.

For compute workloads that rely on raw FP32 throughput, the RTX 5090 SE's 66.94 TFLOPS edge over 61.32 TFLOPS is modest but real. For memory-bandwidth-bound workloads, the RTX 5090 SE's 1.34 TB/s versus 864.0 GB/s is a clear win.

For capacity-bound workloads, the W7900's 48 GB versus 24 GB is decisive. For fill-rate-bound scenarios, the W7900's pixel rate advantage applies. For any scenario requiring verified performance data, the W7900 is the only card with evidence in the database.