Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB vs ION
Aggregate performance score
We've compared ION with Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB, including specs and performance data.
PRO W7800 48 GB outperforms ION by a whopping 11444% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1435 | 209 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 6.31 |
| Power efficiency | 1.05 | 8.66 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | RDNA 3 (2023−2025) |
| GPU code name | C79 | Navi 31 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 18 June 2008 (18 years ago) | 15 November 2024 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 16 | 4480 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 1895 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2525 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 314 million | 57.7 billion |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 281 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 3.600 | 707.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0352 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 128 |
| TMUs | 8 | 280 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 70 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 2.2 MB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | 6 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 96 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCI | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 280 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 8-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 48 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 864.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.9 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.27 | 31.17 |
| Recency | 18 June 2008 | 15 November 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 281 Watt |
ION has 93% lower power consumption.
PRO W7800 48 GB, on the other hand, has a 11444% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, and a 92% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the ION in performance tests.
Be aware that ION is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
