RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation vs Radeon PRO W7600

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking128not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation69.64no data
Power efficiency19.64no data
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 33AD107
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date3 August 2023 (1 year ago)21 March 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores20483072
Core clock speedno data930 MHz
Boost clock speed2440 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate312.3139.7
Floating-point processing powerno data8.94 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs12896
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed18 GB/s2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s256.0 GB/s

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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.23.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.9

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 August 2023 21 March 2023
Chip lithography 6 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 35 Watt

PRO W7600 has an age advantage of 4 months.

RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 271.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon PRO W7600 and RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7600 is a workstation card while RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation is a mobile workstation one.


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

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.


AMD Radeon PRO W7600
Radeon PRO W7600
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 3 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.