GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 and AMD Radeon PRO W7600 represent two distinct eras of professional GPU design. The data shows a fascinating clash between a 2016 flagship with a massive memory bus and a 2023 mainstream card built on a modern, dense process node. While the benchmark results offer a clear winner in raw compute, the architectural and feature-set differences paint a more complex picture for professional workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it results in a victory for the older NVIDIA Quadro GP100. The NVIDIA card scores 88,528 points, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 scores 81,528 points. This translates to an 8.6% performance advantage for the Quadro GP100, a significant margin in a single benchmark run.

Placing these scores in context with their nearest rivals is revealing. The Quadro GP100's average benchmark score of 88,528 puts it 3.1% ahead of the Radeon PRO W7600's average of 85,851. This delta is smaller than the head-to-head OpenCL gap suggests, indicating that the Radeon's Vulkan performance helps close the overall average gap. The Quadro GP100 also sits just 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro VII's average score of 88,961 and 2.9% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile's 91,134, making it highly competitive with its immediate peers.

For the Radeon PRO W7600, its average score of 85,851 places it in a tight cluster. It is a mere 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637) and 1.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 (84,306). This positioning shows that while the Quadro GP100 wins the head-to-head, the W7600 is by no means a slouch, trading blows with some of the most powerful consumer and professional cards available.

The data indicates that in pure OpenCL compute, the Quadro GP100's older architecture still holds a decisive edge. This is likely due to its massive 4096-bit memory bus and HBM2 memory providing a bandwidth advantage that is difficult to overcome, even with a more modern GPU design. The 8.6% delta in the head-to-head test is the single most significant data point for comparing their raw compute capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

Based on benchmark wins, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is the clear victor in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 8.6% lead in the head-to-head benchmark is its primary claim to fame. This suggests that for applications heavily reliant on OpenCL, such as certain scientific computing or rendering tasks, the Quadro GP100 would deliver measurably faster results. Its 95th percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the W7600's 94th, further underscores its strength in this area.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600, while having zero head-to-head benchmark wins, demonstrates its strengths in other areas evident from the data. It has a dedicated Geekbench Vulkan score of 90,174, a test in which the Quadro GP100 has no score. This indicates a clear advantage in Vulkan-based applications, which are becoming increasingly common in modern game engines and real-time rendering. The W7600’s average score is also bolstered by this Vulkan performance, keeping it competitive despite its OpenCL deficit.

The Radeon's win condition is not raw compute throughput but rather a combination of modern API support and efficiency. Its architecture, clock speeds, and feature set are designed for contemporary workloads. The data shows that while it loses the OpenCL battle, its overall average score is only 3.1% lower than the Quadro GP100's, demonstrating that it can close the gap in a mixed workload environment. The choice between the two depends on whether the primary software stack is built on OpenCL or modern APIs like Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures, and the data highlights just how much GPU design has changed in seven years. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is based on the Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm TSMC process. It is a massive chip, with 15,300 million transistors on a 610 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 25.1M / mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm TSMC process. It packs 13,300 million transistors into a much smaller 204 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher transistor density of 65.2M / mm².

This process node difference has profound implications for power and efficiency. The Quadro GP100 has a TDP of 235 W and requires a 550 W suggested power supply, while the Radeon PRO W7600 has a TDP of just 130 W with a 300 W suggested PSU. This makes the W7600 dramatically more power-efficient on paper. The memory subsystems also reflect this generational gap. The Quadro GP100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, delivering a massive bandwidth of 732.2 GB/s. The W7600, by contrast, has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The compute architectures are also divergent. The Quadro GP100 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 138.5 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 323.2 GTexel/s. It offers 10.34 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 20.69 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1). The Radeon PRO W7600 has fewer hardware resources, with 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. However, its clocks are much higher, with a boost of 2440 MHz versus the Quadro's 1443 MHz. This allows it to achieve a higher pixel rate of 156.2 GPixel/s and a nearly identical texture rate of 312.3 GTexel/s. Most importantly, its FP32 compute is significantly higher at 19.99 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 39.98 TFLOPS.

The W7600 also includes 32 RT cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pascal-based Quadro GP100. The Radeon also supports newer PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Quadro is on PCIe 3.0 x16. Display output differs as well, with the Quadro offering DVI and DisplayPort 1.4a, while the W7600 provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The Radeon PRO W7600 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, versus the Quadro's DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is the winner in the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark, scoring 88,528 points versus the AMD Radeon PRO W7600's 81,528 points, an 8.6% advantage.

Q: How does the overall average benchmark score compare between the two?

A: The Quadro GP100 has an average benchmark score of 88,528, which is 3.1% higher than the Radeon PRO W7600's average score of 85,851.

Q: Does the newer Radeon PRO W7600 support any features the Quadro GP100 lacks?

A: Yes, the data shows the Radeon PRO W7600 includes 32 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, features not present on the Pascal-based Quadro GP100.

Q: What are the differences in power requirements?

A: The Radeon PRO W7600 is far more efficient, with a TDP of 130 W and a 300 W suggested PSU, compared to the Quadro GP100's 235 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: How does memory bandwidth differ between the two cards?

A: The Quadro GP100 has a massive bandwidth advantage with 732.2 GB/s from its 4096-bit HBM2 interface, compared to the Radeon PRO W7600's 288.0 GB/s from its 128-bit GDDR6 interface.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan-based workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 demonstrates a clear advantage, as it has a dedicated Geekbench Vulkan score of 90,174, while the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has no recorded Vulkan benchmark score in the data.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, though nuanced, verdict. For professionals whose primary applications rely on OpenCL compute, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is the stronger choice. Its 8.6% head-to-head lead and 3.1% higher average benchmark score are decisive in this specific area. The card's enormous memory bandwidth of 732.2 GB/s is a likely contributor to this sustained performance, making it a viable option for data-heavy compute tasks even years after its release.

However, the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the more future-proof and versatile option. Its support for modern APIs like Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate, combined with its 32 RT cores, makes it the better fit for contemporary software stacks. While it loses the OpenCL contest, its average score is only slightly lower, and its Vulkan score of 90,174 suggests it can outperform the Quadro in newer rendering pipelines. Its significantly lower power draw and smaller physical footprint are also major practical advantages.

The choice ultimately comes down to workload. If the software is legacy and OpenCL-bound, the Quadro GP100's raw compute power is compelling. For any modern workflow that leverages Vulkan, ray tracing, or requires higher efficiency, the Radeon PRO W7600 is the data-supported recommendation. The Quadro GP100 wins the battle of the one benchmark we have, but the W7600 wins the war of architectural relevance and efficiency.