AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA PG506-232 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark database paints a starkly asymmetrical picture for these two workstation class accelerators. The NVIDIA PG506-232 and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 do not compete across a broad front of overlapping strengths. Instead, the recorded data shows a single decisive confrontation in the OpenCL workload, with the NVIDIA part securing the only win.

The NVIDIA PG506-232 wins the sole head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 225124 places it 166.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900's score of 84379 in the same test. This is not a marginal advantage; it is a dominant, multi-generational gap in raw compute throughput under the OpenCL API. The PG506-232 also sits at the 99th percentile among all GPUs in the database, indicating that its performance ceiling is near the very top of the recorded spectrum.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 does not win any head-to-head benchmark in the database. Its strengths lie elsewhere, but they are not captured in the comparison tests available. The W7900 does post a Geekbench Vulkan score of 137070, a test that the PG506-232 has no recorded result for, as the NVIDIA card lists no output support and likely no graphics API compatibility. This is a significant caveat: the AMD card can render and accelerate graphical workloads, while the NVIDIA PG506-232 is a compute-only accelerator with no display outputs.

Examining the average benchmark scores reinforces the split. The PG506-232 has an average benchmark score of 225124, derived from its single OpenCL result. The W7900's average benchmark score is 110725, which is the mean of its OpenCL score of 84379 and its Vulkan score of 137070. The NVIDIA card's average is roughly double that of the AMD card, but this is skewed by the fact that the AMD card has two benchmark entries, one of which (OpenCL) is exceptionally low relative to its Vulkan result.

The percentile rankings further contextualize the gap. The PG506-232 is in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it outperforms 99% of recorded devices. The W7900 is in the 94th percentile, which is still strong, but clearly a step below the NVIDIA part in overall standing. For a workstation buyer, this means the PG506-232 is positioned at the extreme high end of compute performance, while the W7900 is merely very good.

In terms of nearest rivals, the PG506-232 sits close to the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D, which has an average score of 219827, a 2.4% deficit. It is also 8.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB and 14.9% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000D, but it trails the NVIDIA L20 by 10.4%. The W7900's nearest rivals are different: it is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II, 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X, and 2.8% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile, with a 3.2% deficit against the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB. These rival deltas show that the W7900 is in a competitive cluster of mid-range to high-end workstation parts, whereas the PG506-232 is in a loftier tier.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the choice between these two accelerators depends entirely on the workload type.

For users whose primary task is OpenCL compute, the NVIDIA PG506-232 is the unequivocal choice. Its score of 225124 versus 84379 is a 166.8% advantage, a margin so large that no other consideration in the database can overcome it. This is a compute monster, and the 99th percentile ranking confirms its elite status. The PG506-232 is also end-of-life, but its performance profile remains relevant for specific compute tasks.

For users who need graphical output, display connectivity, or Vulkan rendering, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the only option between the two, because the PG506-232 has no display outputs. The W7900's Vulkan score of 137070 demonstrates a capable graphics pipeline, and its 48 GB of memory dwarfs the PG506-232's 24 GB. The W7900 is active, current production, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the PG506-232 lists no graphics API support.

The average benchmark score tells a mixed story. The PG506-232's average of 225124 is higher, but the W7900's average of 110725 is dragged down by its weak OpenCL showing. If a user only cares about the mean across all tests, the NVIDIA card wins, but that mean is based on a single test for the NVIDIA part and two tests for the AMD part. The database does not contain enough overlapping tests to declare an overall winner across all possible workloads.

The verdict is therefore a functional split. Compute-only users should pick the NVIDIA PG506-232 for its massive OpenCL lead. Users who require a workstation GPU with display outputs, modern graphics APIs, and double the memory should pick the AMD Radeon PRO W7900. The data does not support a single recommendation for all users.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. This is the decisive benchmark for this pairing.

The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225124 in Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 84379 in the same test. The delta is 166.8% in favor of the NVIDIA card. To put this in perspective, the PG506-232's score is more than 2.66 times the AMD card's score. This is not a close contest; it is a rout.

This result aligns with the PG506-232's nearest rival comparisons. Its average score of 225124 is 2.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D, which scores 219827. It is 8.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (207124) and 14.9% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 6000D (195964). However, the NVIDIA L20 scores 251147, which is 10.4% higher than the PG506-232, indicating that even within NVIDIA's own lineup, the PG506-232 is not the absolute fastest.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900's average score of 110725 places it in a different competitive bracket. It is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (109617) and 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107342). It trails the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8% (113944) and the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 3.2% (114395). These deltas, all in the low single digits, show that the W7900's average performance is tightly clustered with several other workstation cards, none of which approach the PG506-232's raw score.

The Vulkan benchmark is the second data point for the W7900, with a score of 137070. The PG506-232 has no recorded Vulkan score, and given that it has no display outputs and no listed graphics API support, it is likely that this test is not applicable to it. This means the W7900 has a functional capability that the PG506-232 simply does not possess, even if the database does not allow a direct numerical comparison.

In summary, the head-to-head benchmark data shows a single massive win for the NVIDIA PG506-232 in OpenCL, a test that heavily favors its compute-oriented architecture. The AMD card's Vulkan score provides evidence of graphical capability, but it cannot match the NVIDIA card's compute throughput in the one test where they are directly compared.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225124, which is 166.8% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7900's score of 84379.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 in head-to-head comparisons. The NVIDIA PG506-232 wins the only head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench OpenCL) with a 166.8% delta.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The NVIDIA PG506-232 has an average benchmark score of 225124. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has an average benchmark score of 110725, which is the average of its OpenCL score of 84379 and its Vulkan score of 137070.

Q: How does the PG506-232 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The PG506-232 has an average score 2.4% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D (219827), 8.7% higher than the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (207124), and 14.9% higher than the NVIDIA RTX 6000D (195964). It is 10.4% lower than the NVIDIA L20 (251147).

Q: How does the W7900 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The W7900 has an average score 1% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (109617) and 3.2% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107342). It is 2.8% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113944) and 3.2% lower than the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114395).

Q: Does the NVIDIA PG506-232 support graphics output?

A: No. The PG506-232 has no display outputs. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA PG506-232 and AMD Radeon PRO W7900 are built on fundamentally different architectures, which explains their divergent benchmark results.

The PG506-232 uses the GA100 chip, based on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The die size is 826 mm², with 54,200 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 65.6 million per mm². Its memory configuration is 24 GB of HBM2 with a 3072-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 933.1 GB/s. The memory clock is 1215 MHz, which translates to 2.4 Gbps effective. The core configuration includes 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, and 224 tensor cores. It has no dedicated ray tracing cores. The base clock is 930 MHz with a boost clock of 1440 MHz. Its compute rates are 10.32 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, with a 1:1 ratio. The pixel rate is 138.2 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 322.6 GTexel/s. The card has a TDP of 165 W, uses a single 8-pin EPS power connector, and requires a 450 W suggested PSU. It is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long and 112 mm high. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The PG506-232 is end-of-life, released on 2021-04-11, with its predecessor being Tesla Turing and its successor being Server Ada.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip, based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 529 mm² and 57,700 million transistors. The transistor density is much higher at 109.1 million per mm². Its memory is 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 864.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 2250 MHz, or 18 Gbps effective. The core configuration is substantially different: 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores. The base clock is 1760 MHz with a boost clock of 2495 MHz. Its FP32 and FP16 compute rates are both 61.32 TFLOPS, a 1:1 ratio, which is nearly 6 times the FP32 rate of the PG506-232. The pixel rate is 479.0 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 958.1 GTexel/s. The TDP is 295 W, requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. It is a triple-slot card, 280 mm long, 110 mm high, and 51 mm wide. It has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The W7900 is active production, released on 2023-05-25, with a predecessor of Radeon Pro Vega and no listed successor. Its launch MSRP is 3,999 USD.

The architectural divide is clear. The PG506-232 is a compute-focused accelerator with no graphics outputs, relying on HBM2 memory and tensor cores for AI and scientific workloads. The W7900 is a full-featured workstation GPU with ray tracing cores, modern graphics API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and a much higher raw FP32 throughput. The PG506-232's lower TDP of 165 W versus 295 W suggests it is designed for dense server deployments, while the W7900's triple-slot cooler and display outputs indicate a desktop workstation focus. The memory type also differs: HBM2 on the NVIDIA card offers higher bandwidth density, while the AMD card's GDDR6 provides more capacity at 48 GB. The 5 nm process on the AMD card allows for a much higher transistor density, but the NVIDIA card's larger die and older process still deliver superior OpenCL performance in the recorded data.