AMD Radeon PRO W7900D vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two parts, and neither GPU has any individual benchmark entries, average scores, or nearest rival comparisons. Both cards sit at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database, which is the neutral default position when no performance measurements exist. This absence of data makes direct performance comparison impossible from measurements alone.

What can be compared is the theoretical compute ceiling each card is built around. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS. That is a 5.5x difference in raw single-precision compute, and it shows up across every rate-based metric in the specification sheet. The AMD card reaches a pixel rate of 414.0 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part, a 7.4x gap. Texture rate tells a similar story: 827.9 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s, a 2.8x advantage for AMD.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive split. The W7900D has 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth from a 384-bit GDDR6 interface, while the N1 16SM has 273.2 GB/s from a 256-bit LPDDR5X interface. That is a 3.2x bandwidth advantage for AMD. However, the NVIDIA part carries 128 GB of memory versus 48 GB on the AMD card, so workloads that need capacity beyond 48 GB will favor the N1 16SM regardless of its lower bandwidth. The AMD card also boosts higher in raw clock terms, 2156 MHz versus 2346 MHz for NVIDIA, so the NVIDIA part actually has a higher boost clock by 190 MHz, but it does so with far fewer execution units.

Neither card has any recorded wins in the database, and the wins counter for both is zero. The practical takeaway is that this comparison rests entirely on architectural and specification differences, not measured results.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more FP32 compute power?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS of FP32, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS. The AMD card is roughly 5.5x higher in single-precision throughput.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory. NVIDIA has 80 GB more capacity, but AMD has over 3x the bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD card provides 864.0 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, versus 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit bus on the NVIDIA part. The W7900D is 3.2x faster in raw bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more render output units?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has 192 ROPs, compared to 24 ROPs on the NVIDIA N1 16SM. This 8x difference drives the large gap in pixel fill rate.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 16SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database, indicating no recorded API support.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speed?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM boosts to 2346 MHz, which is 190 MHz higher than the AMD card's 2156 MHz boost clock. The AMD card has a higher base clock at 1327 MHz versus 741 MHz.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families and are built for different roles. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, under the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, listed under the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. The NVIDIA part has no codename recorded.

Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, which is where the fabrication similarities end. The AMD die measures 529 mm² and contains 57,700 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The NVIDIA die is smaller at 382 mm², and its transistor count is listed as unknown in the database, with no density figure recorded.

Execution resources differ substantially. The AMD card has 6144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA adds 64 tensor cores, while the AMD card lists no tensor core count at all. This makes the NVIDIA part the only one of the two with dedicated tensor hardware in the database.

The memory architecture also diverges. AMD uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz for 18 Gbps effective. NVIDIA uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1067 MHz for 8.5 Gbps effective. These are fundamentally different memory strategies: AMD prioritizes bandwidth for throughput-heavy workloads, while NVIDIA prioritizes capacity for large working sets.

The system interface differs as well. The AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA card is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width, no power connectors, and no dimensions recorded. The AMD card is a triple-slot add-in board requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU.

Display outputs are minimal on the NVIDIA side, with just 1x HDMI. The AMD card offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. This reflects the different intended deployment: the NVIDIA N1 16SM appears designed for embedded or integrated use, while the W7900D is a full workstation card.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7900D | NVIDIA N1 16SM |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | unknown |

| Base Clock | 1327 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2156 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 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 listed | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 414.0 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 827.9 GTexel/s | 300.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 52.99 TFLOPS | 9.609 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 52.99 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 listed |

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

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

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2025-09-24 | 2026-05-31 |

The release dates place the AMD card roughly eight months earlier in the database. The AMD card also has a recorded predecessor, the Radeon Pro Vega, while the NVIDIA part has no predecessor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D wins on raw compute throughput. Its 52.99 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 figures are both 5.5x higher than the NVIDIA part. Its pixel rate of 414.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 827.9 GTexel/s are 7.4x and 2.8x higher respectively. Memory bandwidth of 864.0 GB/s is 3.2x higher, which matters for rendering large scenes, real-time visualization, and compute kernels that stream data continuously. The 384-bit GDDR6 bus, 96 ray tracing cores, and triple-slot cooling with a 295 W TDP all point toward sustained, high-throughput workstation workloads. The API support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 makes it usable across mainstream graphics stacks.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins on memory capacity and integration. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X is 2.7x the AMD card's capacity, which allows working sets that exceed 48 GB without spilling to system memory. Its 64 tensor cores give it dedicated AI acceleration hardware that the AMD card does not list. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface is a generation newer than the AMD card's PCIe 4.0 x16. As an IGP with no power connectors and no recorded TDP, it fits into systems where a large add-in board is not an option. The higher boost clock of 2346 MHz also shows the NVIDIA part can reach higher instantaneous clock speeds, though with far fewer execution units behind it.

Neither card has benchmark wins recorded, so these allocations are based on specification deltas rather than measured results.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by workload type. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is the choice for compute-heavy and graphics-heavy tasks where throughput is the bottleneck: FP32 and FP16 workloads, high-resolution rasterization, texture-heavy rendering, and applications that exploit ray tracing across 96 cores. Its 52.99 TFLOPS, 414.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 864.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the stronger performer on paper in every throughput metric the database records.

The NVIDIA N1 16SM is the choice for capacity-limited and integration-constrained environments. Its 128 GB memory pool is the dominant advantage, and its 64 tensor cores provide AI-specific processing that the AMD card cannot match. The IGP form factor and lack of power connectors mean it can be deployed in compact systems where the triple-slot, 295 W AMD card physically cannot fit. The newer PCIe 5.0 interface also provides a faster host link.

The release timeline shows the NVIDIA part arriving later, with a 2026 release date versus 2025 for AMD. Both cards are listed as Active in production status. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database, and neither has benchmark data or nearest rivals. Users should treat the specification sheet as the only available evidence. For raw rendering and compute throughput, the AMD card dominates every rate metric. For memory capacity, tensor acceleration, and low-footprint integration, the NVIDIA part is the only option that fits.