Radeon PRO W7800 vs Pro W6800

Place in the ranking	51	14
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	24.60	31.10
Power efficiency	14.24	19.63
Architecture	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Navi 21	Navi 31
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	8 June 2021 (3 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,249	$2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7800 has 26% better value for money than Pro W6800.

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 cores	3840	4480
Core clock speed	2075 MHz	1895 MHz
Boost clock speed	2320 MHz	2525 MHz
Number of transistors	26,800 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	556.8	707.0
Floating-point processing power	17.82 TFLOPS	45.25 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	128
TMUs	240	280
Ray Tracing Cores	60	70

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	267 mm	280 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512.0 GB/s	576.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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

6x mini-DisplayPort

3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.1	2.2
Vulkan	1.2	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

Pro W6800 51.58

PRO W7800 73.96
+43.4%

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.

Pro W6800 19832

PRO W7800 28439
+43.4%

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	157 −40.1%	220−230 +40.1%
1440p	120 −41.7%	170−180 +41.7%
4K	93 −39.8%	130−140 +39.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	14.32 −26.1%	11.36 +26.1%
1440p	18.74 −27.5%	14.70 +27.5%
4K	24.18 −25.8%	19.22 +25.8%

PRO W7800 has 26% lower cost per frame in 1080p
PRO W7800 has 27% lower cost per frame in 1440p
PRO W7800 has 26% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	110−120 −39.1%	160−170 +39.1%
Elden Ring	180−190 −42.9%	270−280 +42.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Counter-Strike 2	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	110−120 −39.1%	160−170 +39.1%
Forza Horizon 4	282 −41.8%	400−450 +41.8%
Metro Exodus	61 −39.3%	85−90 +39.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 −35.4%	130−140 +35.4%
Valorant	210−220 −37.6%	300−310 +37.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Counter-Strike 2	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	110−120 −39.1%	160−170 +39.1%
Dota 2	114 −40.4%	160−170 +40.4%
Elden Ring	180−190 −42.9%	270−280 +42.9%
Far Cry 5	45 −33.3%	60−65 +33.3%
Fortnite	200−210 −39.4%	290−300 +39.4%
Forza Horizon 4	277 −26.4%	350−400 +26.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	121 −40.5%	170−180 +40.5%
Metro Exodus	116 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 −39.5%	300−310 +39.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	95−100 −35.4%	130−140 +35.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 −37.9%	240−250 +37.9%
Valorant	210−220 −37.6%	300−310 +37.6%
World of Tanks	270−280 −43.4%	400−450 +43.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Counter-Strike 2	110−120 −37.9%	160−170 +37.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	110−120 −39.1%	160−170 +39.1%
Dota 2	86 −39.5%	120−130 +39.5%
Far Cry 5	110−120 −36.4%	150−160 +36.4%
Forza Horizon 4	268 −30.6%	350−400 +30.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 −39.5%	300−310 +39.5%
Valorant	210−220 −37.6%	300−310 +37.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	88 −36.4%	120−130 +36.4%
Elden Ring	110−120 −36.8%	160−170 +36.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	88 −36.4%	120−130 +36.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −42.9%	250−260 +42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 −42.9%	80−85 +42.9%
World of Tanks	300−350 −36.4%	450−500 +36.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −42.9%	120−130 +42.9%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −35.6%	80−85 +35.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 −35.6%	80−85 +35.6%
Far Cry 5	150−160 −38.4%	220−230 +38.4%
Forza Horizon 4	212 −41.5%	300−310 +41.5%
Metro Exodus	55 −36.4%	75−80 +36.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 −38.6%	140−150 +38.6%
Valorant	180−190 −40.5%	260−270 +40.5%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −37.9%	80−85 +37.9%
Dota 2	125 −36%	170−180 +36%
Elden Ring	55−60 −37.9%	80−85 +37.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	125 −36%	170−180 +36%
Metro Exodus	55 −36.4%	75−80 +36.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −41.2%	250−260 +41.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −35.1%	50−55 +35.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	125 −36%	170−180 +36%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −40.6%	90−95 +40.6%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 −37.9%	80−85 +37.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −29.6%	35−40 +29.6%
Dota 2	94 −38.3%	130−140 +38.3%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −37.9%	120−130 +37.9%
Fortnite	80−85 −32.5%	110−120 +32.5%
Forza Horizon 4	126 −42.9%	180−190 +42.9%
Valorant	100−110 −37.3%	140−150 +37.3%

This is how Pro W6800 and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

PRO W7800 is 40% faster in 1080p
PRO W7800 is 42% faster in 1440p
PRO W7800 is 40% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	51.58	73.96
Recency	8 June 2021	13 April 2023
Chip lithography	7 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	260 Watt

Pro W6800 has 4% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 43.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro W6800 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.