AMD Radeon PRO W7900D vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D or the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. Both entries show an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs, with zero head-to-head benchmark entries and zero wins recorded for either part. This means the data cannot support any comparative performance claims based on measured workloads.

What can be derived from the database is the theoretical compute ceiling of each product. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32. That places the AMD part at more than double the raw floating-point throughput (2.2 times the NVIDIA figure). For FP16 workloads, both products operate at a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 rates, so the AMD card again leads by the same 2.2x margin.

The pixel throughput comparison is similarly lopsided. The Radeon PRO W7900D renders at 414.0 GPixel/s, while the N1X 40SM manages 93.84 GPixel/s. That represents a 4.4x advantage for AMD in fill-rate-limited scenarios. Texture rate is closer, with the AMD part at 827.9 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, a modest 10% lead.

Memory bandwidth also favors AMD decisively. The Radeon PRO W7900D accesses 864.0 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM reaches 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit interface. The AMD card moves data at 3.2 times the rate of the NVIDIA part. Memory capacity, however, reverses the ranking: the N1X 40SM carries 128 GB of LPDDR5X, versus 48 GB of GDDR6 on the Radeon. The NVIDIA part holds 2.7 times more memory, which can matter for very large model residency.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The AMD GPU operates at a 1327 MHz base and 2156 MHz boost. The NVIDIA GPU has a much lower base of 741 MHz but a higher boost of 2346 MHz. The boost delta is 190 MHz in NVIDIA's favor, yet the AMD part still produces far higher throughput because of its larger shader array (6144 shading units versus 5120) and faster memory clock (2250 MHz versus 1067 MHz).

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. AMD uses the Navi 31 chip built on RDNA 3.0, with the codename Plum Bonito, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. NVIDIA uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0, with no codename listed, and belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. Both are fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, so process node does not differentiate them.

Die size differs considerably. AMD's Navi 31 measures 529 mm² and contains 57,700 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². NVIDIA's GB20B measures 382 mm² with transistor count listed as unknown, so density cannot be calculated. The AMD die is 38% larger in area but packs far more transistors per square millimeter.

Compute resources differ across every unit type. The Radeon PRO W7900D contains 6144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores. The N1X 40SM contains 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, and 40 RT cores. AMD leads in all four categories: 20% more shaders, 20% more TMUs, 4.8x more ROPs, and 2.4x more RT cores. The NVIDIA part counters with 160 tensor cores, which AMD does not list at all (the field is null), indicating the absence of dedicated tensor hardware or an unreported specification.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. AMD pairs 48 GB of GDDR6 with a 384-bit bus, achieving 864.0 GB/s. NVIDIA pairs 128 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus, achieving 273.2 GB/s. The memory type difference explains part of the bandwidth gap: GDDR6 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) while LPDDR5X runs at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA part uses a narrower bus but compensates with much higher capacity.

API support also separates the two. AMD lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which reflects its integrated graphics processor (IGP) positioning rather than a discrete workstation accelerator. The Radeon card exposes standard workstation APIs, while the N1X part appears oriented toward a different software stack.

Physical and electrical specifications show the largest divergence. The AMD card is a triple-slot device, 280 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 51 mm wide, requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested power supply, with a TDP of 295 W. The NVIDIA part is an IGP, meaning no slot width, no dimensions listed, no power connectors, and no TDP listed. The bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are 3x DisplayPort 2.1 plus 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 for AMD, versus a single HDMI for NVIDIA.

Release timing is documented for both. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D launched on September 24, 2025, with a predecessor listed as Radeon Pro Vega. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM launched on May 31, 2026, with no predecessor listed. Both are marked as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two products with opposite strengths. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D dominates in raw compute throughput: 52.99 TFLOPS FP32, 414.0 GPixel/s, 827.9 GTexel/s, and 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It also carries far more ROPs (192 versus 40) and RT cores (96 versus 40). For any workload that stresses shader math, rasterization, texture filtering, or memory bandwidth, the AMD card is the clear choice based on the specification sheet.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM offers two advantages in the database. First, memory capacity: 128 GB versus 48 GB, which is 2.7 times more. Second, tensor cores: 160 dedicated units versus none listed on the AMD side. The NVIDIA part also uses a newer PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while AMD is on PCIe 4.0 x16. These features point toward large-model inference or tensor-heavy computations where capacity and dedicated matrix hardware matter more than raw FP32 throughput.

The IGP form factor of the NVIDIA part is a further differentiator. With no power connectors, no TDP, and no physical dimensions, it is designed for integration into a system rather than as a discrete expansion card. The AMD card, by contrast, is a full triple-slot discrete GPU requiring substantial power delivery. The choice between the two depends entirely on the intended deployment: the AMD card suits traditional workstation rendering and compute tasks with high bandwidth demands, while the NVIDIA part suits memory-hungry, tensor-accelerated workloads in an integrated form factor.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two entries:

• Manufacturer: AMD versus NVIDIA
• Chip: Navi 31 versus GB20B
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus Blackwell 2.0
• Codename: Plum Bonito versus null
• Generation: Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) versus Blackwell IGP (N1x)
• Transistors: 57,700 million versus unknown
• Die Size: 529 mm² versus 382 mm²
• Transistor Density: 109.1M / mm² versus null
• Base Clock: 1327 MHz versus 741 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2156 MHz versus 2346 MHz
• Memory Clock: 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective versus 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 48 GB versus 128 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 versus LPDDR5X
• Memory Bus Width: 384 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 864.0 GB/s versus 273.2 GB/s
• Shading Units: 6144 versus 5120
• TMUs: 384 versus 320
• ROPs: 192 versus 40
• RT Cores: 96 versus 40
• Tensor Cores: null versus 160
• Pixel Rate: 414.0 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 827.9 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s
• FP32: 52.99 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS
• FP16: 52.99 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 24.02 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 295 W versus unknown
• Slot Width: Triple-slot versus IGP
• Power Connectors: 2x 8-pin versus None
• Suggested PSU: 600 W versus null
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 versus 1x HDMI
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A
• OpenGL: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan: 1.4 versus N/A
• Dimensions: 280 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm versus null
• Release Date: 2025-09-24 versus 2026-05-31
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega versus null

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS, which is 2.2 times the 24.02 TFLOPS of the NVIDIA N1X 40SM.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has 48 GB of GDDR6. The NVIDIA part holds 2.7 times more memory.

Q: Which product has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has 96 RT cores, compared to 40 on the NVIDIA N1X 40SM, giving AMD a 2.4x advantage.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1X 40SM support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The database lists DirectX as N/A for the NVIDIA part. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D reaches 864.0 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM reaches 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. AMD's bandwidth is 3.2 times higher.

Q: What power connectors does each product require?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D requires 2x 8-pin connectors with a 600 W suggested PSU and a 295 W TDP. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM requires no power connectors and has an unknown TDP, consistent with its IGP form factor.