Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile with Radeon AI PRO R9700, including specs and performance data.

RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile
2025
6 GB GDDR7, 35 Watt
27.05

AI PRO R9700 outperforms RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile by a whopping 152% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking24123
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data29.31
Power efficiency59.3617.48
ArchitectureBlackwell 2.0 (2025−2026)RDNA 4.0 (2025)
GPU code nameGB207Navi 48
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date19 March 2025 (less than a year ago)23 July 2025 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores17924096
Core clock speed2235 MHz1660 MHz
Boost clock speed2520 MHz2920 MHz
Number of transistorsno data53,900 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate141.1747.5
Floating-point processing power9.032 TFLOPS47.84 TFLOPS
ROPs24128
TMUs56256
Tensor Cores56128
Ray Tracing Cores1464
L0 Cacheno data1 MB
L1 Cache1.8 MBno data
L2 Cache24 MB8 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 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).

InterfacePCIe 5.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 16-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 typeGDDR7GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB32 GB
Memory bus width96 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2518 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.0 GB/s644.6 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
Vulkan1.41.3
CUDA12.0-
DLSS++

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 HD59
−137%
140−150
+137%
1440p38
−150%
95−100
+150%
4K29
−141%
70−75
+141%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data9.28
1440pno data13.67
4Kno data18.56

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
−124%
350−400
+124%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
−146%
150−160
+146%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 100−110
−148%
260−270
+148%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
−124%
350−400
+124%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
−146%
150−160
+146%
Escape from Tarkov 100−110
−143%
250−260
+143%
Far Cry 5 99
−142%
240−250
+142%
Fortnite 130−140
−131%
300−310
+131%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−150%
270−280
+150%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
−141%
210−220
+141%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
−145%
270−280
+145%
Valorant 180−190
−149%
450−500
+149%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 100−110
−148%
260−270
+148%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
−124%
350−400
+124%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
−142%
650−700
+142%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
−146%
150−160
+146%
Escape from Tarkov 100−110
−143%
250−260
+143%
Far Cry 5 89
−147%
220−230
+147%
Fortnite 130−140
−131%
300−310
+131%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−150%
270−280
+150%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
−141%
210−220
+141%
Grand Theft Auto V 113
−148%
280−290
+148%
Metro Exodus 60−65
−142%
150−160
+142%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
−145%
270−280
+145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
−147%
210−220
+147%
Valorant 180−190
−149%
450−500
+149%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
−148%
260−270
+148%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
−146%
150−160
+146%
Escape from Tarkov 100−110
−143%
250−260
+143%
Far Cry 5 85
−147%
210−220
+147%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−150%
270−280
+150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
−145%
270−280
+145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
−147%
210−220
+147%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 130−140
−131%
300−310
+131%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
−146%
150−160
+146%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
−132%
450−500
+132%
Grand Theft Auto V 59
−137%
140−150
+137%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−150%
95−100
+150%
Valorant 210−220
−152%
550−600
+152%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
−140%
180−190
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−150%
70−75
+150%
Escape from Tarkov 60−65
−150%
160−170
+150%
Far Cry 5 59
−137%
140−150
+137%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−150%
180−190
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
−139%
110−120
+139%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
−150%
170−180
+150%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−150%
70−75
+150%
Grand Theft Auto V 50−55
−141%
130−140
+141%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−150%
60−65
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
−138%
100−105
+138%
Valorant 160−170
−144%
400−450
+144%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
−133%
100−105
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−150%
30−33
+150%
Escape from Tarkov 30−33
−150%
75−80
+150%
Far Cry 5 29
−141%
70−75
+141%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−145%
120−130
+145%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−142%
75−80
+142%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
−142%
75−80
+142%

This is how RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile and AI PRO R9700 compete in popular games:

  • AI PRO R9700 is 137% faster in 1080p
  • AI PRO R9700 is 150% faster in 1440p
  • AI PRO R9700 is 141% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 27.05 68.27
Recency 19 March 2025 23 July 2025
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 5 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 300 Watt

RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile has 757.1% lower power consumption.

AI PRO R9700, on the other hand, has a 152.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon AI PRO R9700 is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon AI PRO R9700 is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile
RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile
AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700
Radeon AI PRO R9700

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 2 votes

Rate RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 18 votes

Rate Radeon AI PRO R9700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile or Radeon AI PRO R9700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.