AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA N1 16SM

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 and the NVIDIA N1 16SM occupy entirely different positions in the database. The W7900 is a dedicated workstation graphics card with a 94th percentile ranking and a recorded average benchmark score of 110,725, while the N1 16SM is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 50th percentile ranking and no recorded benchmark scores. The data confirms that the W7900 is the dominant compute and rendering solution, whereas the N1 16SM is designed for a different, more power-efficient role with a massive memory pool.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins in every category of raw graphics performance. Its recorded benchmarks include a Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,379 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 137,070, giving it an average benchmark score of 110,725. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no benchmark entries in the database, so its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. The W7900 also leads decisively in compute throughput, with FP32 performance of 61.32 TFLOPS compared to the N1 16SM's 9.609 TFLOPS. This makes the W7900 roughly 6.4 times faster in raw single-precision floating-point work, a gap that directly affects rendering, simulation, and machine learning workloads.

The N1 16SM wins in memory capacity and integration. It carries 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, which is 80 GB more than the W7900's 48 GB of GDDR6. For workloads that require enormous datasets to reside on the GPU, such as large language model inference or massive in-memory databases, the N1 16SM's capacity advantage is significant. It also uses an IGP slot width with no power connectors, making it suitable for compact systems where a triple-slot card cannot fit. The N1 16SM supports PCIe 5.0 x16, a newer bus interface than the W7900's PCIe 4.0 x16, which provides higher host-to-device bandwidth potential.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Plum Bonito, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture and belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process node, but their transistor counts and die sizes diverge sharply. The W7900 packs 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The N1 16SM has an unknown transistor count on a smaller 382 mm² die, with no transistor density figure recorded.

Core configurations differ by a wide margin. The W7900 contains 6,144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 render output units, and 96 ray tracing cores. The N1 16SM has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 16 RT cores. The N1 16SM does include 64 tensor cores, a feature absent from the W7900's recorded specifications. Clock speeds also favor the W7900: its base clock is 1760 MHz with a boost of 2495 MHz, while the N1 16SM runs at a 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. Memory architecture differs as well: the W7900 uses a 384-bit GDDR6 interface with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the N1 16SM uses a 256-bit LPDDR5X interface with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two products, and the N1 16SM has no individual benchmark scores recorded. The comparison must therefore rely on the W7900's measured results and the architectural figures for both. The W7900's Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,379 and Vulkan score of 137,070 place it firmly in the high-performance tier. Its average benchmark score of 110,725 puts it 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (average score 109,617), 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (average score 107,342), 2.8% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (average score 113,944), and 3.2% behind the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (average score 114,395).

On the compute side, the W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS FP32 and 61.32 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16. The W7900 also produces a pixel rate of 479.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 958.1 GTexel/s, compared to the N1 16SM's 56.30 GPixel/s and 300.3 GTexel/s. In memory bandwidth, the W7900's 864.0 GB/s is more than three times the N1 16SM's 273.2 GB/s. The N1 16SM counters only with its 128 GB memory capacity and lower power footprint, though its TDP is listed as unknown.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the appropriate choice for any workload requiring high compute throughput, high memory bandwidth, or advanced graphics features. Its 94th percentile ranking across all GPUs, combined with its 61.32 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 864.0 GB/s bandwidth, makes it a capable workstation card for rendering, simulation, and compute tasks. The W7900's 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, while smaller than the N1 16SM's pool, is still substantial for most professional applications, and its 96 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support provide modern graphics capabilities.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM is suited for systems where memory capacity and integration matter more than raw speed. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory is the standout feature, and its IGP form factor with no power connectors allows deployment in space-constrained environments. The N1 16SM's 50th percentile ranking and lack of benchmark scores mean it cannot compete with the W7900 on performance, but its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and 64 tensor cores indicate a different intended use case, likely focused on large-scale inference or memory-intensive workloads rather than high-FPS rendering. Users with performance-critical tasks should choose the W7900; users who need maximum memory capacity in a low-power integrated package should consider the N1 16SM.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has an average benchmark score of 110,725, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM has no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of 0.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS FP32, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 864.0 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the NVIDIA N1 16SM's 273.2 GB/s.

Q: What are the form factor differences?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is a triple-slot card using 2x 8-pin power connectors, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM is an IGP with no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU supports newer PCIe?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 supports PCIe 4.0 x16.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7900 | NVIDIA N1 16SM |

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

| Chip | Navi 31 | GB20B |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Codename | Plum Bonito | None |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) | Blackwell IGP (N1x) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | Unknown |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1760 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2495 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 864.0 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 6144 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 384 | 128 |

| ROPs | 192 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 96 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 479.0 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 958.1 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.32 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 295 W | Unknown |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | IGP |

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

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x HDMI |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Dimensions | 280 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm | None recorded |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Release Date | 2023-05-25 | 2026-05-31 |

| Launch MSRP | 3,999 USD | None |