AMD Radeon 8050S vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II records an average benchmark score of 109,617, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon 8050S averages 62,108, which lands in the 89th percentile.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro Vega II compare to its nearest rival in terms of average score?

A: The closest competitor is the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 with an average score of 110,725, which is 1% higher than the Pro Vega II. The Pro Vega II also sits 3.8% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944) but leads the Pro W6600X (107,342) by 2.1% and the Pro Vega II Duo (106,750) by 2.7%.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference in the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro Vega II scores 99,621 versus 58,398 for the Radeon 8050S, a delta of 70.6%. In Geekbench OpenCL, the difference is 50.5%, with 99,048 versus 65,818.

Q: Which GPU supports hardware ray tracing?

A: The AMD Radeon 8050S includes 32 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega II is built on TSMC's 7 nm process with 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die. The Radeon 8050S uses TSMC's 4 nm process with a 308 mm² die, though its transistor count is listed as unknown.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 8050S boosts to 2800 MHz, significantly higher than the Radeon Pro Vega II's boost of 1720 MHz. The base clocks are 1295 MHz for the 8050S and 1574 MHz for the Pro Vega II.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies separated by several generations of AMD architecture. The Radeon Pro Vega II uses the Vega 20 chip with GCN 5.1 architecture, a professional workstation design from the Radeon Pro Mac generation. The Radeon 8050S employs the Strix Halo chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, belonging to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) lineup.

The process node difference is substantial. The Pro Vega II is fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the 8050S uses a more advanced 4 nm process. The Pro Vega II packs 13,230 million transistors across a 331 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.0M per mm². The 8050S has a smaller 308 mm² die, but its transistor count is not recorded in the database. This newer node allows the 8050S to achieve much higher clock speeds despite far lower power consumption.

Shader and compute resources diverge sharply. The Pro Vega II features 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The 8050S has exactly half the shading units (2048) and half the TMUs (128), while retaining the same 64 ROPs. However, the 8050S adds 32 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the Pro Vega II, which lacks any ray tracing hardware in the database.

Memory architecture could hardly be more different. The Pro Vega II carries 32 GB of HBM2 memory across a 4096-bit bus, delivering 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth with a memory clock of 806 MHz (1612 Mbps effective). The 8050S uses system shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. This means the 8050S relies on the host system's memory subsystem rather than dedicated VRAM.

The API support also reflects their generational gap. The Pro Vega II supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The 8050S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and the newer Vulkan 1.4. This gives the 8050S access to the newer DirectX feature tier and Vulkan revisions.

Physical design and power delivery separate them completely. The Pro Vega II is a quad-slot card using the Apple MPX bus interface, with a TDP of 475 W and a suggested power supply of 850 W. The 8050S is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no slot width, no power connectors, and a TDP of just 55 W. The Pro Vega II connects through Apple MPX, while the 8050S uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the Pro Vega II provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt, whereas the 8050S outputs are portable device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro Vega II wins decisively in raw compute benchmarks. In both head-to-head tests, it outperforms the Radeon 8050S by a wide margin. The OpenCL score shows a 50.5% advantage, and the Vulkan score shows a 70.6% advantage. This makes the Pro Vega II the clear choice for applications that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan compute workloads, particularly those that can utilize its massive 32 GB HBM2 memory pool and 4096-bit bus.

The Pro Vega II also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 32 GB of dedicated HBM2 memory and 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth, it is designed for large data sets and memory-intensive professional workloads. The 8050S, relying on system shared memory, cannot match this dedicated bandwidth or capacity. For tasks like high-resolution rendering, large simulation datasets, or multi-layer compositing, the Pro Vega II's memory subsystem is a significant advantage.

The Radeon 8050S wins in efficiency and portability. Its 55 W TDP is a fraction of the Pro Vega II's 475 W, and it requires no external power connectors. As an integrated processor, it fits into portable devices without the physical footprint of a quad-slot card. The 8050S also wins on architectural features: its 32 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a capability the Pro Vega II completely lacks. For modern games or rendering workloads that use ray tracing, the 8050S is the only option between these two.

The 8050S also wins on clock speed. Its boost clock of 2800 MHz is substantially higher than the Pro Vega II's 1720 MHz. While the Pro Vega II compensates with more shading units, the 8050S's higher clocks and newer architecture can deliver competitive performance in workloads that scale with clock frequency rather than raw shader count. The 8050S also achieves a higher pixel rate of 179.2 GPixel/s compared to 110.1 GPixel/s for the Pro Vega II, indicating better fill-rate efficiency per clock.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: Vega 20 versus Strix Halo
• Architecture: GCN 5.1 versus RDNA 3.5
• Generation: Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) versus Navi Mobile (RX 8000M)
• Process Node: 7 nm versus 4 nm
• Transistors: 13,230 million versus unknown
• Die Size: 331 mm² versus 308 mm²
• Transistor Density: 40.0M / mm² versus null
• Base Clock: 1574 MHz versus 1295 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1720 MHz versus 2800 MHz
• Memory Clock: 806 MHz (1612 Mbps effective) versus system shared
• Memory Size: 32 GB versus system shared
• Memory Type: HBM2 versus system shared
• Bus Width: 4096 bit versus system shared
• Bandwidth: 825.3 GB/s versus system dependent
• Shading Units: 4096 versus 2048
• TMUs: 256 versus 128
• ROPs: 64 versus 64 (same)
• RT Cores: none versus 32
• Pixel Rate: 110.1 GPixel/s versus 179.2 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 440.3 GTexel/s versus 358.4 GTexel/s
• FP32: 14.09 TFLOPS versus 11.47 TFLOPS
• FP16: 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 11.47 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 475 W versus 55 W
• Slot Width: Quad-slot versus IGP
• Power Connectors: null versus none
• Suggested PSU: 850 W versus null
• Bus Interface: Apple MPX versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt versus portable device dependent
• DirectX: 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Vulkan: 1.3 versus 1.4
• Production Status: End-of-life versus active
• Release Date: 2019-06-02 versus 2025-01-05
• Launch MSRP: 2,199 USD versus null
• Predecessor: null versus Polaris Mobile

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, both using Geekbench compute tests. The results are unambiguous: the Radeon Pro Vega II wins both tests by substantial margins.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro Vega II scores 99,048 against 65,818 for the Radeon 8050S. This represents a 50.5% advantage for the Pro Vega II. The magnitude of this win is notable given the architectural differences. The Pro Vega II's 4096 shading units and 14.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance likely drive this result, as OpenCL workloads tend to scale with raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth. The 825.3 GB/s of HBM2 bandwidth versus system shared memory for the 8050S is a decisive factor in memory-heavy compute tasks.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows an even larger gap. The Pro Vega II scores 99,621, while the 8050S manages 58,398, a delta of 70.6%. This is the largest performance difference recorded in the head-to-head data. Vulkan compute can be sensitive to driver optimization and hardware architecture. The Pro Vega II's GCN 5.1 architecture, despite being older, appears to handle this particular Vulkan workload far more efficiently. Even though the 8050S supports the newer Vulkan 1.4 API, its lower shader count (2048) and reduced FP32 throughput (11.47 TFLOPS) cannot overcome the Pro Vega II's raw compute resources.

The average benchmark scores corroborate this hierarchy. The Pro Vega II's average of 109,617 places it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the 8050S averages 62,108 in the 89th percentile. The Pro Vega II's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725, 1% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944, 3.8% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342, 2.1% lower). The 8050S sits near the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896, 0.3% higher) and trails the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693) by 2.5%.

In terms of wins, the Pro Vega II takes both head-to-head tests, giving it a 2-0 record. The 8050S has no wins in the recorded benchmarks. However, the 8050S's higher pixel rate (179.2 GPixel/s versus 110.1 GPixel/s) and lower TDP suggest that in specific rasterization-bound workloads or efficiency-sensitive environments, it could offer advantages not captured by these compute-focused tests. The data as recorded, though, clearly favors the Pro Vega II for raw compute performance.