Radeon PRO W7900 vs RX 6900 XT

Place in the ranking	24	12
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	29.96	18.04
Power efficiency	15.96	17.59
Architecture	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Navi 21	Navi 31
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	28 October 2020 (4 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$999	$3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6900 XT has 66% better value for money than PRO W7900.

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	5120	6144
Core clock speed	1825 MHz	1855 MHz
Boost clock speed	2250 MHz	2495 MHz
Number of transistors	26,800 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	300 Watt	295 Watt
Texture fill rate	720.0	958.1
Floating-point processing power	23.04 TFLOPS	61.32 TFLOPS
ROPs	128	192
TMUs	320	384
Ray Tracing Cores	80	96

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	3-slot	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 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	16 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	512.0 GB/s	864.0 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	1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	+	-

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	6.7
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.

RX 6900 XT 66.91

PRO W7900 72.51
+8.4%

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.

RX 6900 XT 26739

PRO W7900 28976
+8.4%

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	188 −6.4%	200−210 +6.4%
1440p	130 −7.7%	140−150 +7.7%
4K	81 −4.9%	85−90 +4.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.31 +276%	20.00 −276%
1440p	7.68 +272%	28.56 −272%
4K	12.33 +281%	47.05 −281%

RX 6900 XT has 276% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 6900 XT has 272% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RX 6900 XT has 281% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	160−170 −3.7%	170−180 +3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	160−170 −5.6%	170−180 +5.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −2.6%	120−130 +2.6%
Counter-Strike 2	160−170 −3.7%	170−180 +3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	76 −5.3%	80−85 +5.3%
Forza Horizon 4	350−400 −2.6%	400−450 +2.6%
Forza Horizon 5	170−180 −6.1%	190−200 +6.1%
Metro Exodus	126 −3.2%	130−140 +3.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 −2.4%	130−140 +2.4%
Valorant	480 −4.2%	500−550 +4.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −2.6%	120−130 +2.6%
Counter-Strike 2	160−170 −3.7%	170−180 +3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	64 −1.6%	65−70 +1.6%
Dota 2	160−170 −7.8%	180−190 +7.8%
Far Cry 5	130−140 −6.9%	140−150 +6.9%
Fortnite	270−280 −6.2%	290−300 +6.2%
Forza Horizon 4	350−400 −2.6%	400−450 +2.6%
Forza Horizon 5	170−180 −6.1%	190−200 +6.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	160−170 −7.8%	180−190 +7.8%
Metro Exodus	123 −5.7%	130−140 +5.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 −7%	230−240 +7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	124 −4.8%	130−140 +4.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 −3.4%	180−190 +3.4%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 −7.5%	300−310 +7.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 −2.6%	120−130 +2.6%
Counter-Strike 2	160−170 −3.7%	170−180 +3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	53 −3.8%	55−60 +3.8%
Dota 2	160−170 −7.8%	180−190 +7.8%
Far Cry 5	130−140 −6.9%	140−150 +6.9%
Forza Horizon 4	350−400 −2.6%	400−450 +2.6%
Forza Horizon 5	170−180 −6.1%	190−200 +6.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 −7%	230−240 +7%
Valorant	411 +2.8%	400−450 −2.8%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Dota 2	130−140 −3.7%	140−150 +3.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	130−140 −3.7%	140−150 +3.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −2.9%	180−190 +2.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	82 −3.7%	85−90 +3.7%
World of Tanks	450−500 −2%	500−550 +2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 −3.4%	90−95 +3.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	36 +2.9%	35−40 −2.9%
Far Cry 5	160−170 −6.3%	170−180 +6.3%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 −6.7%	270−280 +6.7%
Forza Horizon 5	130−140 −5.3%	140−150 +5.3%
Metro Exodus	117 −2.6%	120−130 +2.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 −3.9%	160−170 +3.9%
Valorant	328 −6.7%	350−400 +6.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −2.3%	45−50 +2.3%
Dota 2	150−160 −2.6%	160−170 +2.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	150−160 −2.6%	160−170 +2.6%
Metro Exodus	67 −4.5%	70−75 +4.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 −5.3%	220−230 +5.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55 +0%	55−60 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 −8.3%	170−180 +8.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −5.6%	95−100 +5.6%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 −2.3%	45−50 +2.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Dota 2	150−160 −2.6%	160−170 +2.6%
Far Cry 5	100−110 −4.8%	110−120 +4.8%
Fortnite	95−100 −4.2%	100−105 +4.2%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 −7.9%	150−160 +7.9%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 −2.4%	85−90 +2.4%
Valorant	185 −8.1%	200−210 +8.1%

This is how RX 6900 XT and PRO W7900 compete in popular games:

PRO W7900 is 6% faster in 1080p
PRO W7900 is 8% faster in 1440p
PRO W7900 is 5% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	66.91	72.51
Recency	28 October 2020	13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	7 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	300 Watt	295 Watt

PRO W7900 has a 8.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 1.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 6900 XT and Radeon PRO W7900.

Be aware that Radeon RX 6900 XT is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7900 is a workstation one.

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