A2 vs PRO W7900 for Blender
Compare A2 16 GB and PRO W7900 48 GB for Blender Cycles. See benchmark performance, VRAM, power ratings and checked prices side by side. PRO W7900 48 GB leads the Blender benchmark score by 268.2%.
Fastest in Cycles
PRO W7900 48 GB
268% faster than A2 16 GB
Most VRAM
PRO W7900 48 GB
200% more VRAM than A2 16 GB
Lowest power draw
A2 16 GB
80% lower rating than PRO W7900 48 GB
Cheapest
Cannot compare
Price unavailable for some GPUs
Best value for money
Cannot compare
Price or benchmark unavailable for some GPUs
GPU comparison
Key specifications for Blender rendering.
| Spec | A2 16 GB | PRO W7900 48 GB |
|---|---|---|
| Lowest price | $770.00 Checked Oct 9, 2026 | Price unavailable No current offer matches your preferences. |
| Value for money | 1.28 | N/A |
| Blender benchmark score | 982.86 | 3,618.68 +268% |
| VRAM | 16 GB More headroom for complex scenes | 48 GB More capacity for heavy scenes+200% |
| System PSU | 250 W Secondary source suggestion−58% | 600 W Secondary source suggestion |
| Render support | CUDA, OpenCL | OpenCL |
| Performance | ||
| CUDA cores | 1,280 | N/A |
| Boost clock | 1770 MHz | 2495 MHz +41% |
| RT cores | 10 | 96 +860% |
| Tensor cores | 40 | N/A |
| Memory | ||
| Memory bandwidth | 200.1 GB/s | 864 GB/s +332% |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory bus | 128-bit | 384-bit +200% |
| Platform | ||
| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 3.0 |
| TDP | 60 W −80% | 295 W |
| Release year | 2021 | 2023 |
Blender Cycles benchmarks
Estimated seconds / frame Lower is faster
A2 16 GB
Blender 3.5.0 · OptiX · 6 runs
PRO W7900 48 GB
Blender 3.6.0 · HIP · 5 runs
Junkshop
Monster
Classroom
Which GPU should you choose for Blender?
PRO W7900 48 GB is the stronger Blender rendering pick here based on benchmark score.
Cycles rendering performance
PRO W7900 48 GB leads by 268.2% in the Renderjuice Blender benchmark model (3,619 vs 983). For render-time-first decisions, that is the card to prioritize.
VRAM and scene capacity
PRO W7900 48 GB has more scene headroom with 48 GB of VRAM versus 16 GB on A2 16 GB. That matters most for large environments, dense geometry, high-resolution textures, and less optimized production files.
Power ratings and cooling
A2 16 GB is the lower-power option at 60 W TDP, compared with 295 W for PRO W7900 48 GB. If render speed is close, that can make A2 16 GB easier to cool and run quietly.
Is the upgrade worthwhile?
PRO W7900 48 GB is both the newer and faster Blender rendering choice here. The main reason to choose A2 16 GB would be price, availability, existing ownership, or a specific workstation requirement.
Comparison summary
PRO W7900 48 GB leads the Blender benchmark score by 268.2%.
Fastest in Cycles: PRO W7900 48 GB 268% faster than A2 16 GB.
Most VRAM: PRO W7900 48 GB 200% more VRAM than A2 16 GB.
Lowest power draw: A2 16 GB 80% lower rating than PRO W7900 48 GB.
Cheapest: Cannot compare Price unavailable for some GPUs.
Best value for money: Cannot compare Price or benchmark unavailable for some GPUs.
A2 16 GB has 16 GB of VRAM, while PRO W7900 48 GB has 48 GB, which matters when scenes, textures, or geometry get heavier.
If you are deciding between these cards for Blender, focus first on Blender benchmark score, VRAM capacity, memory bandwidth, and whether your scenes are likely to benefit more from raw speed or extra memory headroom. The comparison table above keeps those tradeoffs in one place.