Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot vs RTX A2000
Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot
Popular choices:
RTX A2000
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot
Performance Per Dollar RTX A2000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RTX A2000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot.
| Insight | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.1%) |
| Longevity | 🔮Strong Longevity (RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) / 7nm) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (280mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The RTX A2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $320 versus $3,499 for the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot, it costs 91% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 1016.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1016.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($3,499) | ✅More affordable ($320) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot and RTX A2000
Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot
The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 3 2021. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1800 MHz to 1967 MHz. It has 3840 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 400W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 60 ×2 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,182 points. Launch price was $4,999.
RTX A2000
The RTX A2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 10 2021. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 562 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 3328 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 70W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 26 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,464 points. Launch price was $449.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot scores 13,182 and the RTX A2000 reaches 13,464 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot is built on RDNA 2.0 while the RTX A2000 uses Ampere, both on 7 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 3,840 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 3,328 (RTX A2000). Raw compute: 15.11 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 7.987 TFLOPS (RTX A2000). Boost clocks: 1967 MHz vs 1200 MHz. Ray tracing: 60 ×2 RT cores (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 26 (RTX A2000) vs 104.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 13,182 | 13,464+2% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ampere |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 3840 ×2+15% | 3328 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 15.11 TFLOPS ×2+89% | 7.987 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1967 MHz+64% | 1200 MHz |
| ROPs | 96 ×2+100% | 48 |
| TMUs | 240 ×2+131% | 104 |
| L1 Cache | 0.75 MB | 3.3 MB+340% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+33% | 3 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 ×2+131% | 26 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 8 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 3 MB (RTX A2000) — the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+200% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+33% | 3 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 12.2 (RTX A2000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 4.0 (2x) (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 7th Gen NVENC (RTX A2000). Decoder: VCN 4.0 (2x) vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A2000).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 4.0 (2x) | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | VCN 4.0 (2x) | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot draws 400W versus the RTX A2000's 70W — a 140.4% difference. The RTX A2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 500W (RTX A2000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 280mm vs 167mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 400W | 70W-83% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 280mm | 167mm |
| Height | 111mm | 68mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 75°C-12% |
| Perf/Watt | 33.0 | 192.3+483% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot launched at $3499 MSRP and currently averages $3499, while the RTX A2000 launched at $450 and now averages $320. The RTX A2000 costs 90.9% less ($3179 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.8 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) vs 42.1 (RTX A2000) — the RTX A2000 offers 1007.9% better value.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot | RTX A2000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3499 | $450-87% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $3499 | $320-91% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.8 | 42.1+1008% |
| Codename | Navi 21 | GA106 |
| Release | August 3 2021 | August 10 2021 |
| Ranking | #157 | #186 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot and RTX A2000
