AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

AMD’s Radeon Instinct MI60 and NVIDIA’s RTX A4500 represent two very different philosophies in workstation-class computing, separated by three years of GPU evolution. The MI60 is an end-of-life data center accelerator built on 7 nm GCN 5.1, while the A4500 is an end-of-life professional workstation card from the Ampere generation. Both target the same 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the benchmark database, yet their architectural approaches and resulting benchmark performance diverge sharply, with the data showing a clear overall winner.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is stark, with NVIDIA’s RTX A4500 winning both recorded benchmark tests decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A4500 scores 141,837 against the MI60’s 92,488, a delta of -34.8% from the AMD card’s perspective. That is a massive 53.3% advantage for NVIDIA in raw compute throughput as measured by OpenCL. The margin narrows somewhat in Geekbench Vulkan, where the A4500 posts 129,980 versus the MI60’s 92,444, representing a -28.9% delta. Even with the smaller gap, the A4500 still leads by 40.6% in Vulkan performance.

These results are not close calls. The MI60’s average benchmark score of 92,466 sits just 0.9% below the A4500’s 91,671 average, but that aggregate masks the real story. The A4500’s OpenCL score alone is 141,837, while its Vulkan result is 129,980. The MI60’s two benchmark scores are nearly identical—92,488 in OpenCL and 92,444 in Vulkan—showing a consistent level of performance regardless of API. In contrast, the A4500 shows a significant API sensitivity, with OpenCL outperforming Vulkan by about 9.1%. This suggests the NVIDIA card is particularly well-optimized for OpenCL workloads, which often dominate professional compute tasks.

Look at the nearest rivals for context. The MI60’s closest competitor is the A4500 itself, with a delta of just 0.9% in average score. The next closest is the RTX A4500 Mobile at 1.5% ahead of the MI60. On the other side, the A4500’s nearest rival is the A4500 Mobile at 0.6% behind, followed by the MI60 at -0.9%. Both cards are clustered tightly in the mid-90th percentile range, but the head-to-head tests reveal that the MI60’s average is buoyed by having only two very similar scores, while the A4500’s average is dragged down by its comparatively lower Vulkan result. The data shows that in any single compute test, the A4500 is faster—often by a wide margin.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A4500 is the superior performer in every measured test. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, securing 2 wins to the MI60’s 0. The A4500’s OpenCL score of 141,837 is a standout, placing it 34.8% above the MI60’s best result. Even in Vulkan, where the A4500’s advantage shrinks to 28.9%, it remains firmly ahead. If your workload relies on OpenCL—common in scientific computing, rendering, and AI inference—the A4500 is the clear choice. The MI60’s only saving grace is its 32 GB of HBM2 memory with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, which could matter for datasets exceeding the A4500’s 20 GB GDDR6 frame buffer, but that is a capacity argument, not a performance one.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the data, the RTX A4500 is the pick for anyone prioritizing raw compute speed. Its 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 and 23.65 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1) are far ahead of the MI60’s 14.75 TFLOPS FP32 and 29.49 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The MI60’s FP16 advantage is misleading because it is achieved at a 2:1 ratio, meaning half-rate execution, whereas the A4500 delivers full-rate FP16. The A4500 also brings dedicated ray tracing cores (56) and tensor cores (224), which the MI60 lacks entirely. For modern workloads that leverage these features, the A4500 is not just faster—it is more capable. The MI60 might appeal to legacy compute environments or memory-bound tasks, but the benchmark scores say the A4500 wins on sheer throughput.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards explains the benchmark gap. The MI60 uses AMD’s GCN 5.1 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process, packing 13,230 million transistors into a 331 mm² die. The A4500 is built on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture using Samsung’s 8 nm node, with 28,300 million transistors on a much larger 628 mm² die. The transistor density is higher on the A4500 (45.1M per mm² versus 40.0M per mm²), but the real difference is scale—NVIDIA put more than twice the transistors to work.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The MI60 offers 32 GB of HBM2 across a 4096-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. The A4500 has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 640.0 GB/s. While the MI60’s bandwidth is 59.4% higher, the A4500’s memory is clocked at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus the MI60’s 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The MI60’s HBM2 advantage is real for bandwidth-heavy workloads, but it comes with a 300 W TDP versus the A4500’s 200 W. The A4500 also has more shading units (7168 vs 4096), more ROPs (96 vs 64), and more TMUs per shader ratio, though the MI60 has more raw TMUs (256 vs 224).

Compute features diverge completely. The A4500 includes 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI tensor operations. The MI60 has neither, relying purely on GCN’s compute units. This shows in the API support: the A4500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI60 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. The A4500 also has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus the MI60’s single mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, making it far more practical for multi-display professional setups.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 delivers 23.65 TFLOPS FP32, which is 60.3% higher than the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60’s 14.75 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the MI60 have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The MI60 has 1.02 TB/s bandwidth from 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, versus the A4500’s 640.0 GB/s from 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX A4500. It has 56 RT cores and 224 tensor cores, while the MI60 has no RT or tensor cores listed.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The MI60’s average benchmark score is 92,466, and the A4500’s is 91,671. The MI60 is 0.9% ahead in this aggregate, despite losing both head-to-head tests.

Q: Which card has a lower power draw?

A: The A4500 has a 200 W TDP, which is 33.3% lower than the MI60’s 300 W TDP, and it also requires a smaller suggested PSU (550 W vs 700 W).

Q: Are both cards end-of-life?

A: Yes, the MI60 was released on 2018-11-17 and the A4500 on 2021-11-22, and both have a production status of “End-of-life.”

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins decisively in compute throughput. Its OpenCL score of 141,837 is more than 53% higher than the MI60’s best result, and its Vulkan score of 129,980 is still 40% above. For any task that runs on OpenCL—including rendering, physics simulation, or GPU-accelerated databases—the A4500 is the clear choice. Its 23.65 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance is uniform, and the presence of 224 tensor cores makes it suitable for AI inference workloads that the MI60 cannot accelerate. The A4500’s 56 RT cores also enable hardware ray tracing, which the MI60 lacks entirely.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 holds advantages in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 32 GB of HBM2 is 60% larger than the A4500’s 20 GB, and its 1.02 TB/s bandwidth is 59.4% higher. For datasets that exceed 20 GB, the MI60 is the only viable option between the two. Its 4096-bit bus and HBM2 technology are designed for memory-bound high-performance computing, even if its compute units are slower. The MI60 also has a higher texture rate (460.8 GTexel/s vs 369.6 GTexel/s) despite fewer shading units, which could benefit certain texture-heavy workloads.

In terms of practical workstation use, the A4500 is superior for display connectivity with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus the MI60’s single mini-DisplayPort. The A4500 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI60 is capped at DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.3. For a professional user, the A4500 is the more flexible and future-proof card. The MI60’s edge cases are narrow: brute-force memory capacity and raw bandwidth, where it wins by specification but loses on every benchmark score recorded. The data says pick the A4500 unless your workload absolutely requires more than 20 GB of VRAM.