Radeon PRO W7800 vs GeForce RTX 3090

Place in performance ranking	19	12
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	16.45	8.66
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2022)	RDNA 3.0 (2022)
GPU code name	Ampere GA102	Navi 31
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	24 September 2020 (3 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,499	$2,499
Current price	$1198 (0.8x MSRP)	$3907 (1.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3090 has 90% better value for money than PRO W7800.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	10496	4480
Core clock speed	1400 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1700 MHz	2499 MHz
Number of transistors	28,300 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	350 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	556.0	699.7

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	PCIe 4.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	313 mm	280 mm
Width	3-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 12-pin	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	GDDR6X	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	19500 MHz	18 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	936.2 GB/s	576.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2	1.3
CUDA	8.5	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RTX 3090 69.29

PRO W7800 74.95
+8.2%

Radeon PRO W7800 outperforms GeForce RTX 3090 by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

RTX 3090 26815

PRO W7800 29006
+8.2%

Radeon PRO W7800 outperforms GeForce RTX 3090 by 8% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	195 −7.7%	210−220 +7.7%
1440p	134 −4.5%	140−150 +4.5%
4K	92 −3.3%	95−100 +3.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

207

−6.3%

220−230
+6.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	138 −1.4%	140−150 +1.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	113 −6.2%	120−130 +6.2%
Battlefield 5	172 −4.7%	180−190 +4.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	177 −7.3%	190−200 +7.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	176 −8%	190−200 +8%
Far Cry 5	202 −4%	210−220 +4%
Far Cry New Dawn	169 −6.5%	180−190 +6.5%
Forza Horizon 4	175 −2.9%	180−190 +2.9%
Hitman 3	199 −5.5%	210−220 +5.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	191 −4.7%	200−210 +4.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	172 −4.7%	180−190 +4.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	251 −7.6%	270−280 +7.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	129 −0.8%	130−140 +0.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	121 −7.4%	130−140 +7.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	101 +1%	100−105 −1%
Battlefield 5	158 −7.6%	170−180 +7.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	169 −6.5%	180−190 +6.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	151 −6%	160−170 +6%
Far Cry 5	194 −3.1%	200−210 +3.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	162 −4.9%	170−180 +4.9%
Forza Horizon 4	175 −2.9%	180−190 +2.9%
Hitman 3	196 −7.1%	210−220 +7.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	167 −7.8%	180−190 +7.8%
Metro Exodus	176 −8%	190−200 +8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	132 −6.1%	140−150 +6.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	231 −3.9%	240−250 +3.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	369 +5.4%	350−400 −5.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	116 −3.4%	120−130 +3.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	92 −3.3%	95−100 +3.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	90 −5.6%	95−100 +5.6%
Battlefield 5	146 −2.7%	150−160 +2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	134 −4.5%	140−150 +4.5%
Far Cry 5	177 −7.3%	190−200 +7.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	144 −4.2%	150−160 +4.2%
Forza Horizon 4	166 −2.4%	170−180 +2.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	180 −5.6%	190−200 +5.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	105 −4.8%	110−120 +4.8%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	149 −7.4%	160−170 +7.4%
Hitman 3	178 −6.7%	190−200 +6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	141 −6.4%	150−160 +6.4%
Metro Exodus	115 −4.3%	120−130 +4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 −3.3%	95−100 +3.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	168 −7.1%	180−190 +7.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	82 −3.7%	85−90 +3.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	78 −2.6%	80−85 +2.6%
Battlefield 5	130 −7.7%	140−150 +7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	93 −7.5%	100−105 +7.5%
Far Cry 5	171 −5.3%	180−190 +5.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	139 −7.9%	150−160 +7.9%
Forza Horizon 4	164 −3.7%	170−180 +3.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	120−130 −2.4%	130−140 +2.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	89 −6.7%	95−100 +6.7%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	96 −4.2%	100−105 +4.2%
Hitman 3	119 −0.8%	120−130 +0.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	76 −5.3%	80−85 +5.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	64 −1.6%	65−70 +1.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	97 −3.1%	100−105 +3.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	152 −5.3%	160−170 +5.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65 −7.7%	70−75 +7.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	56 −7.1%	60−65 +7.1%
Battlefield 5	113 −6.2%	120−130 +6.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +2.2%	45−50 −2.2%
Far Cry 5	108 −1.9%	110−120 +1.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	107 −2.8%	110−120 +2.8%
Forza Horizon 4	147 −2%	150−160 +2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	59 −1.7%	60−65 +1.7%

This is how RTX 3090 and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

PRO W7800 is 7.7% faster than RTX 3090 in 1080p
PRO W7800 is 4.5% faster than RTX 3090 in 1440p
PRO W7800 is 3.3% faster than RTX 3090 in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	69.29	74.95
Recency	24 September 2020	13 April 2023
Cost	$1499	$2499
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	8 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	350 Watt	260 Watt