AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 records an average benchmark score of 110,725 across its recorded tests, placing it in the 94th percentile among all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1 20SM have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database contains no benchmark entries for the NVIDIA N1 20SM. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its percentile versus all GPUs is 50.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What process node do both chips use?

A: Both the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (Navi 31) and the NVIDIA N1 20SM (GB20B) are manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit count?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 6,144 shading units, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has 2,560. The AMD card also has 384 texture mapping units versus 160, and 192 ROPs versus 24.

Q: What is the launch date for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 was released on 2023-05-25. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has a release date of 2026-05-31.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy, but with a significant caveat regarding completeness. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is a fully characterized, actively benchmarked workstation card. Its average score of 110,725 and 94th percentile ranking place it firmly among high-end GPUs. The NVIDIA N1 20SM, by contrast, has no benchmark scores in the database at all, making a direct numeric comparison impossible from recorded measurements.

For users seeking a proven, high-throughput discrete GPU for compute and rendering workloads, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the only option with data to support its capabilities. It delivers 61.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, and a 384-bit memory interface. The NVIDIA N1 20SM, as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with 128 GB of LPDDR5X, targets a different design point entirely. Its lower clock speeds, smaller shading unit count, and absence of benchmark records suggest it serves a different role, likely integrated into a larger system rather than acting as a standalone accelerator.

The choice depends on the workload and the need for verified performance. The Radeon PRO W7900 has the data to back its capabilities. The NVIDIA N1 20SM, while newer in release date and featuring a larger memory pool, offers no recorded performance evidence. Any decision involving the N1 20SM must rely on its specifications alone, which show a much lower compute throughput (12.01 TFLOPS FP32) and a narrower memory bus (256-bit). For applications requiring raw throughput, the AMD card is the data-supported pick. For systems needing a high-capacity unified memory pool with integrated graphics, the N1 20SM presents a distinct but unverified alternative.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no head-to-head benchmark results between these two products. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has two recorded scores: 84,379 in Geekbench OpenCL and 137,070 in Geekbench Vulkan. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has none. Therefore, the only comparative analysis possible comes from the AMD card's nearest rivals in the database, which provide context for its performance tier.

The Radeon PRO W7900's average score of 110,725 sits between several competitors. It is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (average score 109,617) and 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (average score 107,342). Against NVIDIA offerings, it trails the RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8% (that card averages 113,944) and the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 3.2% (that card averages 114,395). These deltas are small, indicating the W7900 competes in a tight performance band.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM has no nearest rivals listed, no benchmark scores, and a percentile ranking of 50, which is the median by definition rather than a measured result. The absence of data means no wins can be assigned to either side. The recorded data simply does not support a quantitative head-to-head comparison. The W7900's wins are implicit in its existence of benchmark results; the N1 20SM has no measurable wins in the database.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially across nearly every measured specification. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses a 529 mm² die with 57,700 million transistors, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has a 382 mm² die with an unknown transistor count. The AMD card has a base clock of 1760 MHz and a boost clock of 2495 MHz, versus 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost for the NVIDIA part. Memory clocks also diverge: 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for AMD, 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory capacity and type differ entirely. The Radeon PRO W7900 offers 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1 20SM offers 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. The AMD card has no tensor cores listed.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the architectural gap. The AMD card produces 479.0 GPixel/s and 958.1 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA card produces 56.30 GPixel/s and 375.4 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance are both 61.32 TFLOPS for AMD, versus 12.01 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. The AMD card is a triple-slot design requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU, with a TDP of 295 W. The NVIDIA card is an IGP with no power connectors and an unknown TDP. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16; the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs differ: three DisplayPort 2.1 plus one mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD, versus a single HDMI for NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB20B chip, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both use a 5 nm process at TSMC, but their design philosophies diverge sharply.

The AMD architecture is a discrete GPU design with a large die (529 mm²) and a high transistor count (57,700 million), yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². It includes 96 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA chip is a smaller die (382 mm²) with an unknown transistor count and density. It includes 80 tensor cores alongside 20 ray tracing cores, but lists no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support in the database. The NVIDIA part is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), indicating it is designed to be embedded in a system rather than installed as a separate card. The AMD part is an active, standalone triple-slot card.

The memory architecture reflects a key difference. AMD uses dedicated GDDR6 with a wide 384-bit bus, prioritizing bandwidth at 864.0 GB/s. NVIDIA uses LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, prioritizing capacity (128 GB) over speed. This suggests the AMD card targets bandwidth-intensive rendering and compute, while the NVIDIA IGP targets unified memory pools for system-level workloads. The AMD card's FP32 and FP16 ratios are both 1:1, as are the NVIDIA's, but the absolute throughput differs by roughly 5x in favor of AMD. The NVIDIA card also lacks the API support listings that the AMD card provides, which may indicate a different software stack or a more limited graphics feature set.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins on virtually every measured performance metric where data exists. It delivers 61.32 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus 12.01 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA N1 20SM, a 5.1x advantage. Its pixel rate of 479.0 GPixel/s is 8.5x higher than the NVIDIA's 56.30 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 958.1 GTexel/s is 2.6x higher than 375.4 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth favors AMD at 864.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s, a 3.2x difference. The AMD card also has more shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores, and it supports a full set of graphics APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4) while the NVIDIA card lists none.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins on memory capacity, offering 128 GB versus 48 GB, a 2.7x advantage. It also has a newer PCIe interface (5.0 x16 versus 4.0 x16), a faster memory type (LPDDR5X versus GDDR6), and tensor cores (80) where the AMD card has none listed. Its IGP form factor means no power connectors and no slot width, making it suitable for compact or integrated systems. Its lower clocks (741 MHz base, 2346 MHz boost) and smaller die (382 mm²) suggest a power-conscious design, though TDP is unknown for NVIDIA.

For workloads that demand raw throughput, rasterization, ray tracing, or high-bandwidth memory access, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the clear choice based on recorded data. For workloads that require a very large memory pool (128 GB) in a unified architecture, or that leverage tensor cores for AI inference, the NVIDIA N1 20SM offers capabilities the AMD card lacks. The absence of benchmark scores for the NVIDIA part means its real-world performance remains unverified. The database supports the AMD card for compute and graphics performance, and the NVIDIA card for memory capacity and integrated deployment. No measured wins exist for the NVIDIA part because no measurements exist.