AMD Radeon RX 7900M vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7900M dominates the head-to-head benchmark results in this comparison, winning both available tests outright. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 does not secure a single victory in the direct comparison, making the AMD part the clear performance leader in the data presented. However, the overall average benchmark score tells a different story: the Quadro RTX 6000 holds a 4.5% advantage over the RX 7900M in average score (101872 vs 97487), a discrepancy that arises because the RX 7900M's benchmark suite includes a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4201, which drags its average down despite strong Geekbench showings.

The RX 7900M wins decisively on compute-oriented workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 129499 against the Quadro's 74179, a margin of 42.7% in AMD's favor. This is not a small edge—it is a massive gap that suggests the RDNA 3.0 architecture is far more efficient at raw parallel compute tasks. The Vulkan results reinforce this pattern: the RX 7900M posts 158760 versus 129564 for the Quadro, an 18.4% lead. For users running Vulkan-based applications or OpenCL compute workloads, the AMD part is the unambiguous choice.

The Quadro RTX 6000, by contrast, wins on average score consistency. Its two Geekbench results (74179 OpenCL and 129564 Vulkan) are closer together, and its average benchmark score of 101872 sits above the RX 7900M's 97487. This suggests the Quadro offers more balanced performance across different API types, while the RX 7900M is heavily weighted toward compute-heavy tasks. The data shows the Quadro also leads against the AMD Radeon Pro VII by 4.9% and against the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo by 4.6%, indicating it remains competitive in its professional workstation niche.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 uses the TU102 chip on the Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon RX 7900M uses the Navi 31 chip on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, also built at TSMC but on a much more advanced 5 nm node. This process difference is stark: the Quadro packs 18,600 million transistors across a 754 mm² die (24.7 million transistors per mm²), while the RX 7900M crams 57,700 million transistors into a smaller 529 mm² die (109.1 million per mm²). The RX 7900M achieves over four times the transistor density, a direct consequence of the newer manufacturing process.

Clock speeds further separate the two. The Quadro RTX 6000 runs at a 1440 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost, while the RX 7900M starts at 1825 MHz base and boosts to 2090 MHz. The AMD part operates at significantly higher frequencies, contributing to its compute advantage. Memory configurations also differ: the Quadro offers 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 7900M has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro provides more memory capacity and bandwidth, but the RX 7900M's memory runs at 18 Gbps effective versus 14 Gbps effective on the Quadro.

Core counts are identical in several respects: both have 4608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 72 ray tracing cores. The Quadro adds 576 tensor cores, which the RX 7900M lacks entirely (tensorCores is null). The RX 7900M counters with 192 ROPs versus the Quadro's 96, doubling the pixel throughput. The RX 7900M achieves 401.3 GPixel/s pixel rate and 601.9 GTexel/s texture rate, while the Quadro posts 169.9 GPixel/s and 509.8 GTexel/s respectively. In raw FP32 compute, the RX 7900M delivers 38.52 TFLOPS versus 16.31 TFLOPS for the Quadro—more than double. FP16 similarly shows 77.05 TFLOPS for AMD versus 32.62 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and physical characteristics diverge sharply. The Quadro RTX 6000 is a dual-slot card drawing 260 W with a 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connector and a 600 W suggested PSU. The RX 7900M is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no slot width, no power connectors, and a much lower 180 W TDP. The Quadro measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the RX 7900M has no listed dimensions. The Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16; the RX 7900M uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the Quadro has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C, while the RX 7900M's outputs are "Portable Device Dependent."

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test delivers the largest performance gap in this comparison. The AMD Radeon RX 7900M scores 129499, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 manages only 74179. That is a 42.7% difference favoring AMD. This result aligns with the RX 7900M's FP32 throughput of 38.52 TFLOPS, which is 2.36 times the Quadro's 16.31 TFLOPS. The OpenCL benchmark appears to scale strongly with raw compute throughput, and the RDNA 3.0 architecture's higher clocks and doubled FP32 capacity translate directly into a massive score advantage.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a narrower but still decisive AMD victory. The RX 7900M scores 158760 versus 129564 for the Quadro, an 18.4% difference. Vulkan performance is less compute-bound than OpenCL, and the Quadro's tensor cores and higher memory bandwidth (672.0 GB/s vs 576.0 GB/s) help close the gap. Still, the RX 7900M's higher pixel rate (401.3 GPixel/s vs 169.9 GPixel/s) and texture rate (601.9 GTexel/s vs 509.8 GTexel/s) give it advantages that the Quadro cannot overcome. The 72 ray tracing cores on each card are equal in count, but the RX 7900M's faster clocks likely benefit ray tracing workloads as well.

The Quadro RTX 6000's only statistical win comes in the average benchmark score, where it leads the RX 7900M by 4.5% (101872 vs 97487). This is because the RX 7900M's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4201 is included in its average, and that low score pulls the mean down significantly. The Quadro has no equivalent low-scoring test in its benchmark set. This highlights a key difference: the RX 7900M is a mobile-class GPU with a broader but more variable benchmark profile, while the Quadro is a desktop workstation card with more consistent results across its tested workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 | AMD Radeon RX 7900M |

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

| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 18,600 million | 57,700 million |

| Die Size | 754 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.7M / mm² | 109.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1440 MHz | 1825 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1770 MHz | 2090 MHz |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 672.0 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 14 Gbps effective | 18 Gbps effective |

| ROPs | 96 | 192 |

| Tensor Cores | 576 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 169.9 GPixel/s | 401.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 509.8 GTexel/s | 601.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 16.31 TFLOPS | 38.52 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 32.62 TFLOPS | 77.05 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 260 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Length | 267 mm | None |

| Height | 111 mm | None |

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

| Release Date | 2018-08-12 | 2023-10-18 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Volta | Polaris Mobile |

| Successor | Workstation Ampere | None |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7900M wins decisively with a score of 129499, which is 42.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000's 74179.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The Quadro RTX 6000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth at 14 Gbps effective. The RX 7900M has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth at 18 Gbps effective.

Q: Does the RX 7900M have tensor cores?

A: No. The RX 7900M has no tensor cores (null value), while the Quadro RTX 6000 has 576 tensor cores.

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

A: The Quadro RTX 6000 has an average benchmark score of 101872, which is 4.5% higher than the RX 7900M's 97487.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute capability?

A: The RX 7900M delivers 38.52 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than double the Quadro RTX 6000's 16.31 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Quadro RTX 6000 has a 260 W TDP and requires a 600 W PSU, while the RX 7900M has a 180 W TDP with no PSU requirement listed.

The Verdict

The data makes the performance hierarchy clear. The AMD Radeon RX 7900M wins both head-to-head benchmarks with substantial margins—42.7% in OpenCL and 18.4% in Vulkan—making it the superior choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its doubled FP32 throughput (38.52 TFLOPS vs 16.31 TFLOPS) and higher pixel rate (401.3 GPixel/s vs 169.9 GPixel/s) provide concrete architectural backing for these results. Users running OpenCL or Vulkan applications should choose the RX 7900M without hesitation.

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 is the better pick for those who value consistency and memory capacity. Its 24 GB of VRAM surpasses the RX 7900M's 16 GB, and its 672.0 GB/s bandwidth exceeds AMD's 576.0 GB/s. The Quadro also holds a 4.5% average score advantage, and its tensor cores (576) enable AI workloads that the RX 7900M cannot accelerate. For workstation users needing large datasets or tensor-based processing, the Quadro remains relevant despite its older Turing architecture.

The RX 7900M is the more efficient part: it delivers higher performance at 180 W TDP versus 260 W for the Quadro, and it is an integrated GPU with no power connectors required. The Quadro requires a dual-slot chassis, 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors, and a 600 W PSU. That efficiency, combined with a 5 nm process node and 109.1 million transistors per mm², makes the RX 7900M the forward-looking choice. The Quadro's 12 nm process and end-of-life production status suggest it is a legacy product.

The verdict is straightforward: the AMD Radeon RX 7900M wins on raw performance, efficiency, and modern architecture. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 wins on memory capacity, tensor core support, and average score stability. Choose the RX 7900M for compute and gaming workloads; choose the Quadro for large-memory professional tasks or tensor-based applications. The data supports both conclusions, but for most users, the RX 7900M's dominant benchmark wins make it the stronger recommendation.