AMD Radeon PRO W7900D vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It has 6,144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 ROPs, 96 ray tracing cores, and 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus.

Q: What are the core specifications of the NVIDIA N1 20SM?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM is based on the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. It pairs with 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 864.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is substantially higher than the NVIDIA N1 20SM's 273.2 GB/s. The AMD card uses GDDR6 memory with an 18 Gbps effective speed, while the NVIDIA part uses LPDDR5X at 8.5 Gbps effective.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D reaches 52.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM provides 12.01 TFLOPS. Both implement FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 figures.

Q: What are the physical form factor differences?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is a triple-slot card measuring 280 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 51 mm in width, requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested power supply. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width, no power connectors, and no listed dimensions.

Q: Which API support do the two cards offer?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1 20SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it does not expose these APIs in the recorded data.

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two products into distinct roles. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is a discrete workstation card with high compute throughput, large memory bandwidth, and standard desktop API support. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is an integrated GPU with a much larger memory pool but significantly lower compute and rendering metrics.

For workloads that rely on raw FP32 compute, pixel fill, or texture throughput, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D holds decisive advantages. Its 52.99 TFLOPS FP32 figure is roughly 4.4 times the NVIDIA part's 12.01 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 827.9 GTexel/s versus 375.4 GTexel/s, and pixel rate of 414.0 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s, further reinforce this gap. Users running general-purpose GPU compute, traditional 3D rendering, or DirectX/Vulkan applications should look to the AMD card.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM counters with a 128 GB memory capacity, which is more than 2.6 times the AMD card's 48 GB. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface also offers a newer generation of host connectivity. For workloads that require holding very large datasets in GPU memory, such as certain inference or large-scale data processing tasks, the NVIDIA part provides the capacity advantage. However, its lower bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s means that moving data in and out of that memory will be slower.

The data does not include benchmark scores for either product, so direct measured performance comparisons are not available. The verdict rests on the specification differences. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is the choice for compute-heavy and graphics-heavy tasks. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is the choice for memory-capacity-bound workloads that can tolerate lower throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for these two products. Both items have empty benchmark arrays, zero wins each, and zero head-to-head measurements. The average benchmark score for both is 0, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs.

Without measured scores, the analysis relies on the specification fields that are present. The FP32 compute gap is the largest differentiator. AMD's 52.99 TFLOPS versus NVIDIA's 12.01 TFLOPS represents a 4.4x advantage for the AMD card. The pixel rate comparison is even more lopsided: 414.0 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s, a 7.4x margin. Texture rate shows AMD at 827.9 GTexel/s versus NVIDIA's 375.4 GTexel/s, a 2.2x difference.

On the memory side, NVIDIA holds the capacity lead with 128 GB versus 48 GB, but AMD holds the bandwidth lead with 864.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s. The AMD bandwidth figure is 3.2x higher. The bus width also differs, with AMD using 384 bit and NVIDIA using 256 bit. The memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for AMD and 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. The AMD base clock is 1327 MHz and boost is 2156 MHz. The NVIDIA base clock is lower at 741 MHz, but its boost clock of 2346 MHz is actually higher than AMD's boost. This suggests the NVIDIA part can reach a higher peak clock, though with far fewer shading units.

The transistor counts also differ. AMD lists 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². NVIDIA's transistor count is listed as unknown, but its die size is 382 mm², which is smaller than AMD's die.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D uses a Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture and the codename Plum Bonito, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM uses a GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture and no codename listed.

Process node is identical at 5 nm with TSMC as the foundry for both. Die size differs: 529 mm² for AMD versus 382 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor count is 57,700 million for AMD and unknown for NVIDIA. Transistor density is 109.1M per mm² for AMD and not listed for NVIDIA.

Memory configurations are starkly different. AMD offers 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA offers 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for AMD versus 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Compute units differ in every category. AMD has 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 RT cores. NVIDIA has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 20 RT cores. NVIDIA additionally has 80 tensor cores, while AMD lists null for tensor cores. AMD has no tensor core equivalent in the data.

Pixel rate is 414.0 GPixel/s for AMD versus 56.30 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 827.9 GTexel/s for AMD versus 375.4 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 and FP16 are both 52.99 TFLOPS for AMD versus 12.01 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and physical specifications show AMD as a discrete card with 295 W TDP, triple-slot width, two 8-pin power connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU. NVIDIA lists unknown TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. Display outputs are 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD versus a single HDMI for NVIDIA. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD and PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Release dates differ, with AMD at 2025-09-24 and NVIDIA at 2026-05-31. Both list production status as Active. AMD has a predecessor listed as Radeon Pro Vega, while NVIDIA has no predecessor listed.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 31 chip. This architecture is built on a 5 nm TSMC process with 57,700 million transistors. The die size is 529 mm², which yields a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². RDNA 3.0 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The card has 96 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed. Its FP16 performance runs at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, indicating no dedicated half-rate FP16 path.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture on the GB20B chip, also fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. Its transistor count is unknown, and the die size is 382 mm², which is smaller than the AMD die. The architecture includes 80 tensor cores alongside 20 ray tracing cores. The API support is listed as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which distinguishes it from the AMD part. The NVIDIA part also has FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32.

The cache hierarchies are not detailed in the data for either product. The memory architecture differs fundamentally: GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus for AMD versus LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus for NVIDIA. The AMD part has a higher bandwidth but lower capacity, while the NVIDIA part has higher capacity but lower bandwidth.

The physical architecture also differs. AMD is a triple-slot discrete card with a 280 mm length, 110 mm height, and 51 mm width. NVIDIA is an IGP with no dimensions listed. The power delivery architecture is also distinct: AMD uses two 8-pin connectors with a 295 W TDP, while NVIDIA uses no connectors and has an unknown TDP.

The generation names also differ. AMD belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation, while NVIDIA belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. The codename Plum Bonito is listed for AMD, with none for NVIDIA. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD and PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA, a newer generation for the NVIDIA part.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D wins in compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 52.99 TFLOPS is 4.4 times higher than the NVIDIA N1 20SM's 12.01 TFLOPS. This makes it the stronger choice for general-purpose GPU compute, scientific simulation, and any workload that scales with shader throughput.

The AMD card also wins in rendering throughput. Its pixel rate of 414.0 GPixel/s is 7.4 times higher than the NVIDIA part's 56.30 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 827.9 GTexel/s is 2.2 times higher than the NVIDIA part's 375.4 GTexel/s. These metrics favor AMD for rasterization, texture-heavy workloads, and display output.

Memory bandwidth is another AMD win. With 864.0 GB/s, the AMD card delivers 3.2 times the bandwidth of the NVIDIA part's 273.2 GB/s. This matters for data-intensive workloads where the GPU must frequently move data between memory and compute units.

The AMD card also wins on API support. It offers DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA part lists N/A for all three. This makes the AMD card suitable for standard graphics applications and gaming-oriented workloads that rely on these APIs.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins on memory capacity. Its 128 GB is 2.7 times the AMD card's 48 GB. This is the clearest advantage for the NVIDIA part. Workloads that need to fit very large models or datasets entirely in GPU memory will benefit from this capacity, even if the bandwidth is lower.

The NVIDIA part also wins on host connectivity through PCIe 5.0 x16, which is a newer bus generation than the AMD card's PCIe 4.0 x16. This could reduce transfer bottlenecks with a compatible host system.

Boost clock is another NVIDIA win. The NVIDIA part reaches 2346 MHz boost versus AMD's 2156 MHz boost. However, this is offset by the NVIDIA part's much lower base clock of 741 MHz versus AMD's 1327 MHz.

The NVIDIA part also has tensor cores, with 80 listed, while the AMD card has none listed. This suggests an advantage for workloads that use tensor operations, such as certain machine learning inference tasks.

The NVIDIA part wins on power efficiency in one regard: it has no power connectors and an unknown TDP, indicating it is designed for integrated use without discrete power delivery. The AMD card requires a 295 W TDP and a 600 W suggested PSU.

In summary, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is the winner for compute, rendering, bandwidth, and API compatibility. The NVIDIA N1 20SM is the winner for memory capacity, tensor core availability, and newer bus interface. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload prioritizes throughput or capacity.