AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon PRO W7700
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 36% higher core clock speed: 1900 MHz vs 1395 MHz
- Around 53% higher boost clock speed: 2600 MHz vs 1695 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 5 nm vs 8 nm
- Around 84% lower typical power consumption: 190 Watt vs 350 Watt
- Around 85% higher memory clock speed: 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective vs 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective)
Launch date | 13 Nov 2023 vs 1 Sep 2020 |
Core clock speed | 1900 MHz vs 1395 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 2600 MHz vs 1695 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm vs 8 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt vs 350 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective vs 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
- Around 11% higher texture fill rate: 556.0 GTexel/s vs 499.2 GTexel/s
- 3.4x more pipelines: 10496 vs 3072
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 24 GB vs 16 GB
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 1050 vs 993
- Around 39% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 26733 vs 19227
- Around 69% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 191412 vs 113243
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 556.0 GTexel/s vs 499.2 GTexel/s |
Pipelines | 10496 vs 3072 |
Maximum memory size | 24 GB vs 16 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1050 vs 993 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 26733 vs 19227 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 191412 vs 113243 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon PRO W7700
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon PRO W7700 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 993 | 1050 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19227 | 26733 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 113243 | 191412 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 732.196 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 7585.258 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 63.011 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 247.569 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2441.384 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 33398 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 33398 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 19948 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon PRO W7700 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ampere |
Code name | Navi 32 | GA102 |
Launch date | 13 Nov 2023 | 1 Sep 2020 |
Place in performance rating | 42 | 44 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $1499 | |
Type | Desktop | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 2600 MHz | 1695 MHz |
Compute units | 48 | |
Core clock speed | 1900 MHz | 1395 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 8 nm |
Pipelines | 3072 | 10496 |
Pixel fill rate | 249.6 GPixel/s | 189.8 GPixel/s |
Texture fill rate | 499.2 GTexel/s | 556.0 GTexel/s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | 350 Watt |
Transistor count | 28100 million | 28300 million |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 556.0 GFLOPS (1:64) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 35.58 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 35.58 TFLOPS | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Form factor | Dual-slot | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
Length | 241 mm, 9.5 inches | 313 mm (12.3 inches) |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 450 Watt | 750 Watt |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 12-pin |
Width | 111 mm, 4.4 inches | Triple-slot |
Height | 138 mm (5.4 inches) | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12.2 |
OpenCL | 2.2 | 2.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 24 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 936.2 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | 384 bit |
Memory clock speed | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) |
Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |