AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The data in the database splits these two workstation cards cleanly. The NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation is the dominant performer in the recorded benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 287,237 compared to the AMD Radeon PRO W7900's 110,725. The RTX 6000 Ada holds a 99th percentile rank among all GPUs, while the Radeon PRO W7900 sits at the 94th percentile. For workloads that stress OpenCL and Vulkan compute, the NVIDIA card is the clear choice based on the measurements.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900, however, is not without its place. It is an active production card with a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD, while the RTX 6000 Ada carries a launch MSRP of 6,799 USD and is end-of-life. Buyers who prioritize the NVIDIA feature set and the benchmark lead will accept the higher entry point. Those who need a current-generation card with a triple-slot cooler and DisplayPort 2.1 outputs will find the AMD option relevant. The data shows the NVIDIA card wins both recorded head-to-head tests, but the AMD card offers a different physical and connectivity profile.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. NVIDIA uses the AD102 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. AMD uses the Navi 31 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Plum Bonito, also on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Both are workstation-class parts, but their internal designs diverge sharply.

The NVIDIA chip packs 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 125.3M per mm². The AMD chip contains 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, with a density of 109.1M per mm². NVIDIA's larger transistor budget translates into a much bigger compute configuration: 18,176 shading units, 568 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. AMD counters with 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The ROP count matches at 192, but the NVIDIA card has roughly three times the shading units.

Ray tracing hardware also differs. NVIDIA includes 142 RT cores and 568 tensor cores. AMD includes 96 RT cores and no tensor core field in the data. That tensor core presence matters for AI-accelerated workflows, and the absence of an equivalent on the AMD side is a structural difference between the two.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity but not in speed. Both cards use 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus. NVIDIA's memory runs at 2500 MHz with 20 Gbps effective, producing 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth. AMD's memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, producing 864.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card offers roughly 11% more memory bandwidth.

Clock behavior differs as well. The AMD card has a much higher base clock at 1760 MHz versus 915 MHz on the NVIDIA card. Boost clocks are close: 2495 MHz on AMD versus 2505 MHz on NVIDIA. Even with the lower base clock, the NVIDIA card achieves higher FP32 throughput at 91.06 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS, and the same 1:1 ratio applies to FP16 on both cards.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a decisive NVIDIA advantage in both tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 6000 Ada scores 311,629 against the Radeon PRO W7900's 84,379, a delta of 269.3%. That is more than a 3.7x margin in the NVIDIA card's favor. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 6000 Ada scores 262,845 against 137,070, a delta of 91.8%, meaning the NVIDIA card nearly doubles the AMD card's result.

The averages tell the same story. The RTX 6000 Ada's average benchmark score of 287,237 places it 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA L40 (284,111) and 14.4% ahead of the NVIDIA L20 (251,147). It trails the NVIDIA L40S by 2.9% (295,763) and the AMD Instinct MI300X by 9.7% (317,994). The Radeon PRO W7900's average of 110,725 sits 1% above the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (109,617) and 3.2% above the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342). It sits 2.8% below the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944) and 3.2% below the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395).

These rival comparisons frame the gap. The RTX 6000 Ada is competing in the same bracket as the L40S and Instinct MI300X, while the Radeon PRO W7900 lands closer to mobile and older workstation parts. The benchmark results indicate that in raw compute terms, the NVIDIA card operates in a higher performance class entirely.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation wins both recorded tests. It scores 311,629 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 84,379 for the AMD Radeon PRO W7900, and 262,845 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 137,070.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both use 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus. The NVIDIA card has higher bandwidth at 960.0 GB/s, while the AMD card provides 864.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each card?

A: The RTX 6000 Ada ranks in the 99th percentile among all GPUs. The Radeon PRO W7900 ranks in the 94th percentile.

Q: Which card has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada includes 568 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has no tensor core data recorded.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of each card?

A: The NVIDIA card is 267 mm long and 112 mm tall, occupying a dual-slot width. The AMD card is 280 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 51 mm wide, occupying a triple-slot width.

Q: What display outputs does each card offer?

A: The NVIDIA card has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The AMD card has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 6000 Ada wins on every recorded benchmark metric. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 311,629 and Vulkan score of 262,845 place it far ahead of the Radeon PRO W7900. The NVIDIA card also leads in memory bandwidth (960.0 GB/s versus 864.0 GB/s), FP32 throughput (91.06 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS), and texture rate (1,422.8 GTexel/s versus 958.1 GTexel/s). Pixel rates are nearly identical at 481.0 GPixel/s versus 479.0 GPixel/s, so rasterization-bound tasks may see less separation than compute-heavy workloads.

The AMD card wins on physical and connectivity grounds. It is the active production model with a successor listed as null, while the NVIDIA card is end-of-life with a Blackwell PRO W successor. The AMD card uses 2x 8-pin power connectors and suggests a 600 W PSU, versus the NVIDIA card's 1x 16-pin connector and 700 W suggested PSU. The AMD card also provides DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, which the NVIDIA card lacks, and it is a triple-slot design with a 51 mm width that may suit different chassis layouts.

For compute workloads measured by Geekbench, the database shows no scenario where the Radeon PRO W7900 takes the lead. The NVIDIA card's 269.3% OpenCL advantage and 91.8% Vulkan advantage are too large to ignore. Users whose software relies on OpenCL or Vulkan acceleration should expect substantially higher throughput from the RTX 6000 Ada.

The Radeon PRO W7900's role is more about availability and interface. It remains in active production, which matters for procurement cycles that require current parts. Its DisplayPort 2.1 support is a genuine feature difference, and its lower transistor count and smaller die may appeal to those who do not need the NVIDIA card's raw compute ceiling. The card also carries a lower launch MSRP at 3,999 USD versus 6,799 USD, though the performance gap in the recorded data is proportionate to that price difference.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation | AMD Radeon PRO W7900 |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | RDNA 3.0 |

| Chip | AD102 | Navi 31 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 76,300 million | 57,700 million |

| Die Size | 609 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 125.3M / mm² | 109.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 915 MHz | 1760 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2505 MHz | 2495 MHz |

| Memory Speed | 2500 MHz, 20 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 960.0 GB/s | 864.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 18176 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 568 | 384 |

| ROPs | 192 | 192 |

| RT Cores | 142 | 96 |

| Tensor Cores | 568 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 481.0 GPixel/s | 479.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 1,422.8 GTexel/s | 958.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 91.06 TFLOPS | 61.32 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 91.06 TFLOPS (1:1) | 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 295 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Triple-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 600 W |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Length | 267 mm | 280 mm |

| Height | 112 mm | 110 mm |

| Width | null | 51 mm |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2022-12-02 | 2023-05-25 |

| Predecessor | Workstation Ampere | Radeon Pro Vega |

| Successor | Blackwell PRO W | null |

| Launch MSRP | 6,799 USD | 3,999 USD |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 287237 | 110725 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 99 | 94 |