GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation and AMD Radeon Pro 5700 occupy adjacent tiers in the workstation GPU landscape, yet the benchmark data reveals a decisive performance gap. The RTX 2000 Ada wins all nine head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 15.5% to 76.9%. While the AMD card holds its own in its percentile ranking, the NVIDIA card consistently delivers higher raw scores across every tested workload, from DirectX 9 legacy titles to modern Vulkan compute.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result appears in the Passmark DirectX 11 test, where the RTX 2000 Ada scores 138 against the Radeon Pro 5700’s 78, a 76.9% advantage. This is not a marginal win; it suggests the NVIDIA architecture handles the draw-call and state-change overhead of DirectX 11 far more efficiently. The gap narrows but remains substantial in Vulkan, where the RTX 2000 Ada posts 83360 versus 51289, a 62.5% lead. Vulkan’s lower-level API often rewards raw hardware throughput, and the NVIDIA card’s 12.00 TFLOPS FP32 versus the AMD’s 6.221 TFLOPS helps explain the outcome.

Compute workloads tell a similar story. In Passmark GPU Compute, the RTX 2000 Ada scores 7834, beating the Radeon Pro 5700’s 4961 by 57.9%. Geekbench OpenCL shows a 47.9% gap (78074 vs 52787), and even the legacy DirectX 9 test favors NVIDIA by 51% (216 vs 143). The smallest delta is in DirectX 10, where the RTX 2000 Ada wins 82 to 71, a 15.5% margin. That narrower spread hints that older, less demanding APIs compress the performance difference, but NVIDIA still leads.

The DirectX 12 result is also notable: 71 for NVIDIA versus 48 for AMD, a 47.9% gap. The RTX 2000 Ada supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Radeon Pro 5700 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). That feature-level difference likely contributes to the score disparity. In 2D performance, the RTX 2000 Ada’s Passmark G2D score of 1072 beats the AMD’s 805 by 33.2%. The overall 3D score, Passmark G3D, lands at 16927 for NVIDIA versus 11583 for AMD, a 46.1% lead.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the trend: the RTX 2000 Ada averages 18954, while the Radeon Pro 5700 averages 18189. The NVIDIA card’s percentile rank of 63 versus AMD’s 62 is close, but the per-test margins show a consistent, often large, NVIDIA advantage. There is no single test where the Radeon Pro 5700 pulls ahead; the wins column reads 9-0 in favor of the RTX 2000 Ada.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation, with an average benchmark score of 18954, is ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5700’s 18189.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan compute?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada scores 83360 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 62.5% higher than the Radeon Pro 5700’s 51289.

Q: Does the AMD card win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the NVIDIA card winning all nine comparisons, with the AMD card recording zero wins.

Q: What is the difference in DirectX feature support?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Radeon Pro 5700 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: How do the two cards compare in raw FP32 compute?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada delivers 12.00 TFLOPS FP32, nearly double the Radeon Pro 5700’s 6.221 TFLOPS.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 2000 Ada sits at the 63rd percentile, one point above the Radeon Pro 5700’s 62nd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a one-sided matchup, but the Radeon Pro 5700 still has contexts where its characteristics matter. The AMD card’s texture rate of 194.4 GTexel/s exceeds the NVIDIA’s 187.4 GTexel/s, and its 256-bit memory bus provides 384.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 256.0 GB/s for the RTX 2000 Ada. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth-bound rather than shader-bound, the AMD card’s wider bus could reduce the gap seen in the compute tests. The Radeon Pro 5700 also has more texture mapping units (144 vs 88) and more render output units (64 vs 48), which can help in certain fill-rate-limited scenarios.

The RTX 2000 Ada wins everywhere the benchmarks measure, but its advantages extend beyond raw scores. It has 2816 shading units versus 2304, 22 ray tracing cores (the AMD has none), and 88 tensor cores. The NVIDIA card’s 16 GB of GDDR6 memory is double the AMD’s 8 GB, which matters for large datasets. Its 5 nm process node (TSMC) versus the AMD’s 7 nm node contributes to a lower 70 W TDP versus 130 W, making the NVIDIA card far more power-efficient per unit of performance.

For users on modern APIs, the RTX 2000 Ada is the clear choice. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, Vulkan 1.4, and ray tracing capability are absent or reduced on the Radeon Pro 5700, which only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). The NVIDIA card’s FP16 performance of 12.00 TFLOPS (1:1) matches its FP32 rate, while the AMD card’s FP16 of 12.44 TFLOPS (2:1) is achieved through packed math, which may not benefit all workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification. The RTX 2000 Ada uses the AD107 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, packing 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die. The Radeon Pro 5700 uses the Navi 10 chip on a 7 nm TSMC process, with 10,300 million transistors on a larger 251 mm² die. Transistor density reflects this: 118.9M / mm² for NVIDIA versus 41.0M / mm² for AMD.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The RTX 2000 Ada runs at a 1620 MHz base and 2130 MHz boost, while the Radeon Pro 5700 runs at 1243 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost. Memory clocks also diverge: the NVIDIA card uses 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), the AMD card 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The RTX 2000 Ada has 16 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus (256.0 GB/s), while the Radeon Pro 5700 has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus (384.0 GB/s).

The compute units differ in count and type. The RTX 2000 Ada has 2816 shading units, 88 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 22 RT cores, and 88 tensor cores. The Radeon Pro 5700 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and no RT or tensor cores. Pixel rate favors NVIDIA (102.2 GPixel/s vs 86.40 GPixel/s), while texture rate favors AMD (194.4 GTexel/s vs 187.4 GTexel/s). FP32 is decisively NVIDIA’s (12.00 vs 6.221 TFLOPS), while FP16 is slightly higher on AMD (12.44 vs 12.00 TFLOPS) but achieved via 2:1 packed math.

Power and physical specs also differ. The RTX 2000 Ada has a 70 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires a 250 W suggested PSU, and uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The Radeon Pro 5700 has a 130 W TDP, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), requires a 300 W suggested PSU, and uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The NVIDIA card has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and measures 168 mm (6.6 inches) long by 69 mm (2.7 inches) high; the AMD card has no display outputs and no listed dimensions. The RTX 2000 Ada is still in active production, while the Radeon Pro 5700 is end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 2000 Ada is built on Ada Lovelace architecture, a descendant of the GeForce 20-series lineage. It uses the AD107 chip, which includes dedicated ray tracing cores (22) and tensor cores (88). These enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features that the Radeon Pro 5700 cannot match, as the Navi 10 chip has neither RT nor tensor cores. Ada Lovelace also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), bringing features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading, which the RDNA 1.0-based Radeon Pro 5700 lacks (it only reaches DirectX 12_1).

The process node difference is a major architectural divider. The 5 nm TSMC node used for the RTX 2000 Ada allows for 18,900 million transistors in a 159 mm² die, yielding a density of 118.9M / mm². The 7 nm TSMC node for the Radeon Pro 5700 fits 10,300 million transistors in 251 mm², a density of just 41.0M / mm². This density advantage helps explain the RTX 2000 Ada’s higher clock speeds (2130 MHz boost vs 1350 MHz) and lower TDP (70 W vs 130 W).

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The RTX 2000 Ada uses a 128-bit bus with 16 GB GDDR6, prioritizing capacity over bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 5700 uses a 256-bit bus with 8 GB GDDR6, prioritizing bandwidth (384.0 GB/s) over capacity. For large models or multi-application workflows, the NVIDIA card’s 16 GB is a clear advantage; for streaming large textures, the AMD card’s wider bus helps. The RTX 2000 Ada’s FP16 execution is 1:1 with FP32 (12.00 TFLOPS), while the Radeon Pro 5700’s FP16 is 2:1 (12.44 TFLOPS), meaning the AMD card’s higher FP16 number requires packed math that may halve throughput in some workloads.

The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD. The AMD card’s full x16 bandwidth could mitigate its lower compute in some data-transfer-heavy tasks. The Radeon Pro 5700 is an IGP with no display outputs, suggesting it is designed for integrated Mac systems, while the RTX 2000 Ada is a dual-slot add-in card with four mini-DisplayPort outputs.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 in every measured test. The largest gap is 76.9% in DirectX 11, the smallest is 15.5% in DirectX 10. The average benchmark scores (18954 vs 18189) and the 9-0 win tally confirm that the RTX 2000 Ada is the superior GPU for general compute, 3D rendering, and API-specific workloads.

Users should pick the RTX 2000 Ada if they need maximum performance in OpenCL, Vulkan, or DirectX 12, or if they require 16 GB of memory, ray tracing, tensor cores, or a low 70 W TDP. It is also the only choice for active production support and modern feature sets like DirectX 12 Ultimate. The card’s 63rd percentile ranking versus the AMD’s 62nd is close, but the per-test margins show the NVIDIA card is consistently faster, often by large margins.

The Radeon Pro 5700 is only preferable in niche scenarios. Its 384.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 256-bit bus make it better suited for bandwidth-bound tasks, and its higher texture rate (194.4 GTexel/s) could help in specific texture-heavy workloads. It also has a wider PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. However, its end-of-life status, lack of display outputs, 130 W TDP, and absence of ray tracing or tensor cores limit its appeal. The data shows no workload where the AMD card wins, so any choice favoring it would rely on qualitative factors like memory bandwidth, not benchmark results. For most users, the RTX 2000 Ada is the data-backed pick.