AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs NVIDIA Tesla P40 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two workstation accelerators. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 84,379 points against the NVIDIA Tesla P40's 62,017 points, a 36.1% advantage. That is a substantial margin, but it becomes even more pronounced in the Vulkan workload. There, the AMD card reaches 137,070 points while the Tesla P40 manages only 68,172, meaning the Radeon PRO W7900 delivers 101.1% higher performance, effectively more than doubling the older NVIDIA part's result in that API.

The OpenCL differential alone tells a clear story about generational scaling. The AMD card's 36.1% lead in OpenCL reflects both architectural efficiency and a much higher raw compute ceiling. In Vulkan, the gap nearly triples in percentage terms, which suggests the AMD architecture is far better suited to modern, low-level graphics APIs. The Tesla P40, by contrast, was designed for compute workloads in datacenter environments where Vulkan graphics rendering was not a primary concern, and its Pascal architecture shows its age in this specific benchmark.

When we look at the broader benchmark landscape, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900's average benchmark score sits at 110,725, which places it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA Tesla P40, with an average score of 65,095, lands in the 89th percentile. That percentile gap, while narrower than the raw score difference might suggest, still indicates that the AMD card is positioned well above the Tesla in overall performance distribution. The AMD card's nearest rivals, such as the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114,395 (3.2% ahead) and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile at 113,944 (2.8% ahead), are all close to its level, whereas the Tesla P40 competes with parts like the AMD Radeon VII at 66,004 (1.4% ahead) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64,212 (1.4% behind). This clearly demonstrates that the two cards occupy different performance tiers entirely.

The head-to-head record shows two wins for the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 and zero for the NVIDIA Tesla P40. No benchmark in the database favors the older NVIDIA part. This is not a close contest with trade-offs in different workloads; it is a consistent, across-the-board superiority for the AMD card in the measured tests.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial and explains the performance results. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Navi 31 chip with the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The process node is TSMC's 5 nm manufacturing process, which is several generations ahead of the Tesla P40's 16 nm node from the same foundry. The transistor count reflects this: the AMD chip packs 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Tesla P40, based on the GP102 chip and the Pascal architecture, contains only 11,800 million transistors on a slightly smaller 471 mm² die, giving it a density of 25.1 million per square millimeter. That is a 4.3x density advantage for the AMD part, a direct consequence of the newer process technology.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The Radeon PRO W7900 carries 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Tesla P40 has 24 GB of GDDR5 on the same 384-bit bus width, but its bandwidth is only 347.1 GB/s. The AMD card offers double the capacity and roughly 2.5 times the bandwidth. Memory clock rates reflect the different technologies: the AMD card runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the Tesla P40 runs at 1808 MHz with 7.2 Gbps effective. The interface also differs, with the AMD card using PCIe 4.0 x16 versus the Tesla P40's PCIe 3.0 x16, which affects host transfer speeds in data-intensive workloads.

Compute resources are another major differentiator. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 6,144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, and 192 render output units. It also includes 96 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Tesla P40, which has no ray tracing hardware. The Tesla P40 offers 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The AMD card's pixel rate is 479.0 GPixel/s versus 147.0 GPixel/s for NVIDIA, and its texture rate is 958.1 GTexel/s versus 367.4 GTexel/s. Floating point performance follows the same pattern: the AMD card achieves 61.32 TFLOPS in FP32, while the Tesla P40 manages 11.76 TFLOPS. For FP16, the divergence is even more extreme: the AMD card delivers 61.32 TFLOPS (a 1:1 ratio with FP32), while the Tesla P40 provides only 183.7 GFLOPS (a 1:64 ratio). This means the AMD card processes half-precision data at the same rate as single-precision, whereas the Tesla P40 is heavily penalized in FP16 workloads.

The Tesla P40 does benefit from a much lower transistor budget, which historically translated to lower manufacturing costs, but the database does not contain cost-per-performance analysis. The AMD card's newer architecture also brings modern API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the Tesla P40's DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD card's Vulkan implementation clearly outperforms in the recorded benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins every measured test. There is no test in the database where the NVIDIA Tesla P40 comes out ahead. The OpenCL score of 84,379 versus 62,017 means the AMD card is the clear choice for OpenCL-based compute workloads, which are common in scientific simulation, image processing, and general-purpose GPU computing. The Vulkan score of 137,070 versus 68,172 indicates that for any Vulkan-rendering task, whether real-time visualization or game development previews, the AMD card delivers more than double the performance.

The Tesla P40, however, still has a distinct role in the datacenter. It is a dual-slot card with no display outputs, designed for headless compute servers. Its 250 W TDP is lower than the AMD card's 295 W, and it uses a single 8-pin EPS power connector. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900, in contrast, is a triple-slot card with 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, making it suitable for workstation visual computing tasks. The Tesla P40's PCIe 3.0 interface, while older, is still compatible with most servers, and its 24 GB of GDDR5 memory, while half the capacity of the AMD card, remains adequate for many inference and batch-processing workloads that do not require large memory footprints.

For users who need maximum FP32 throughput, the AMD card's 61.32 TFLOPS is over five times the Tesla P40's 11.76 TFLOPS. For those who need ray tracing, only the AMD card has the hardware. For those who need display outputs, only the AMD card provides them. The Tesla P40's only advantages in the data are its lower TDP, its dual-slot form factor, and its end-of-life status, which might appeal to buyers seeking legacy compatibility. But those are not performance wins; they are logistical considerations.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 (AMD) versus Pascal (NVIDIA)
• Chip: Navi 31 versus GP102
• Process Node: 5 nm versus 16 nm (both TSMC)
• Transistors: 57,700 million versus 11,800 million
• Die Size: 529 mm² versus 471 mm²
• Transistor Density: 109.1M / mm² versus 25.1M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1760 MHz versus 1303 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2495 MHz versus 1531 MHz
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective versus 1808 MHz 7.2 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 48 GB versus 24 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Memory Bandwidth: 864.0 GB/s versus 347.1 GB/s
• Shading Units: 6144 versus 3840
• TMUs: 384 versus 240
• ROPs: 192 versus 96
• RT Cores: 96 versus null
• Pixel Rate: 479.0 GPixel/s versus 147.0 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 958.1 GTexel/s versus 367.4 GTexel/s
• FP32: 61.32 TFLOPS versus 11.76 TFLOPS
• FP16: 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 183.7 GFLOPS (1:64)
• TDP: 295 W versus 250 W
• Slot Width: Triple-slot versus Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: 2x 8-pin versus 8-pin EPS
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 versus No outputs
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Production Status: Active versus End-of-life
• Release Date: 2023-05-25 versus 2016-09-12
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega versus Tesla Maxwell
• Successor: null versus Tesla Volta
• Launch MSRP: 3,999 USD versus 5,699 USD

The dimensions also differ: the AMD card is 280 mm long, 110 mm high, and 51 mm wide, while the Tesla P40 is 267 mm long and 111 mm high with no recorded width. Both have a suggested PSU of 600 W.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS in FP32, compared to the NVIDIA Tesla P40's 11.76 TFLOPS, a difference of over five times.

Q: How much memory does each card have and what type?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA Tesla P40 has 24 GB of GDDR5. Both use a 384-bit memory bus.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Tesla P40 support ray tracing?

A: No, the Tesla P40 has no ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 includes 96 RT cores.

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

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has an average benchmark score of 110,725, placing it in the 94th percentile. The NVIDIA Tesla P40 averages 65,095, placing it in the 89th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 achieves 864.0 GB/s, while the NVIDIA Tesla P40 provides 347.1 GB/s, meaning the AMD card offers roughly 2.5 times the bandwidth.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is listed as Active, while the NVIDIA Tesla P40 is marked as End-of-life. The Tesla P40's successor is the Tesla Volta.

Q: What display outputs does each card offer?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The NVIDIA Tesla P40 has no display outputs.

Q: How do the cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 137,070 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 101.1% higher than the Tesla P40's 68,172.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 outperforms the NVIDIA Tesla P40 in every recorded benchmark, with margins ranging from 36.1% in OpenCL to 101.1% in Vulkan. It carries double the memory capacity, more than double the bandwidth, over five times the FP32 throughput, and a vastly superior transistor density due to the 5 nm process. It also adds ray tracing support, modern display outputs, and a newer PCIe interface.

The NVIDIA Tesla P40, however, remains relevant for specific legacy use cases. Its lower TDP of 250 W, dual-slot form factor, and 8-pin EPS power connector may fit into existing datacenter infrastructure with minimal changes. Its 24 GB of GDDR5 memory, while smaller and slower, is still usable for certain batch inference workloads. Its end-of-life status means it may be available at lower prices on the secondary market, though the database does not track current pricing. Its Pascal architecture is well understood and has a long history of driver stability in server environments.

For anyone building a new workstation or upgrading an existing one, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the clear choice based on performance alone. It sits in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the Tesla P40 sits in the 89th. The AMD card's nearest rivals are all modern, high-end parts, whereas the Tesla P40 competes with cards from several generations ago. For compute tasks that rely on OpenCL, the AMD card is 36.1% faster. For Vulkan-based workloads, it is more than twice as fast. For tasks requiring large memory buffers, the 48 GB capacity is a decisive advantage.

The only scenario where the Tesla P40 makes sense is one where the workload is already optimized for Pascal, where power draw is a hard constraint, and where display output and modern API features are irrelevant. But even then, the performance gap is so large that the AMD card would likely complete tasks in far less time, offsetting its higher power consumption. The verdict from the data is clear: the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is the superior product in nearly every measurable way.