AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two mobile workstation GPUs. In the two shared benchmark tests, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins outright, and the margins are substantial.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 manages only 10,336. That is a delta of 446.8%, meaning the NVIDIA part delivers more than five times the raw compute throughput in this workload. This is not a close race; it is a generational and architectural chasm. The RTX A2000 Mobile's 8.637 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus the Radeon Pro 455's 1,313.3 GFLOPS (roughly 1.3 TFLOPS) explains the bulk of this gap. The A2000 Mobile also has 2,560 shading units against 768 on the Radeon Pro 455, so the raw shader count is over three times higher, and the clock speed advantage (1,687 MHz boost versus no recorded boost clock) further widens the throughput difference.

The Vulkan test tells a similar story, though the gap narrows slightly. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile posts 53,146 points, and the AMD Radeon Pro 455 reaches 12,240 points. The delta here is 334.2%. While the OpenCL advantage was nearly 4.5 times, the Vulkan advantage is about 4.3 times. Both are dominant margins, but the slightly smaller Vulkan delta hints that AMD's GCN architecture, while ancient by comparison, scales somewhat better on Vulkan's explicit API model than it does on OpenCL's more generic compute path. Still, the NVIDIA GPU's hardware features, including 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, give it a structural advantage in modern workloads that rely on these dedicated units, which the AMD chip lacks entirely.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile holds an average benchmark score of 13,821 across all recorded tests, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 sits at 12,831. The NVIDIA GPU's percentile rank is 55, meaning it sits above 55% of all GPUs in the database. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 sits at the 52nd percentile. The NVIDIA part is not a top-tier card by any stretch, but the AMD part is clearly a lower-tier entry. The average scores show a 7.7% gap in favor of NVIDIA, which is far smaller than the head-to-head deltas, because the AMD part's only recorded benchmarks are the two Geekbench tests and a Metal score (15,916), whereas the NVIDIA part includes a full suite of PassMark tests. The NVIDIA's PassMark G3D score is 9,611, and its PassMark GPU compute score is 4,334. The AMD has no PassMark records in the database, so comparing average scores is apples to oranges in terms of workload coverage.

The nearest rivals in the database further contextualize the NVIDIA's position. The RTX A2000 Mobile's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon 660M, with an average score of 13,812, which is virtually identical (delta of 0.1%). The NVIDIA's also sits just above the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT (13,745, a 0.6% edge) and just below the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (14,029, a 1.5% deficit). This is a strange grouping for a 2021 mobile workstation chip, but it indicates that the RTX A2000 Mobile's overall database profile is that of a mid-range performer, not a flagship.

The AMD Radeon Pro 455, by contrast, is bracketed by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, a 0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847, -0.1%), and the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870, -0.3%). Its closest rival is the GTX 590, a dual-GPU card from 2011. That the Radeon Pro 455's average score is literally identical to a 2011 flagship slays the notion that this 2016 chip aged gracefully. The delta to its nearest rival is 0%, meaning the database finds it indistinguishable in aggregate score.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is the superior GPU in every recorded benchmark that compares the two. In OpenCL, it is 446.8% ahead. In Vulkan, it is 334.2% ahead. The NVIDIA's also has more than twice the average benchmark score (13,821 vs 12,831). If the primary criterion is raw compute performance, the NVIDIA is the only rational choice.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 has one redeeming quality that the NVIDIA lacks: a Metal benchmark score. The AMD's Geekbench Metal result is 15,916, which is not available for the NVIDIA in the database. For macOS applications that rely on Metal (the default graphics API for Apple's ecosystem), the AMD offers a known quantity, whereas the NVIDIA's Metal performance is unrecorded and thus unverified. The AMD is also a lower-power part at 35 W TDP, compared to the NVIDIA's 95 W. For thin-and-light laptops where the GPU is MXM removable and thermals are constrained, the AMD's power draw is a clear advantage, though it comes at the cost of compute.

The NVIDIA's 4 GB of GDDR6 memory and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth doubles the AMD's 2 GB GDDR5 and 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. For large datasets, the NVIDIA's memory capacity and bandwidth are decisive. The AMD's 2 GB capacity is a severe bottleneck for any modern rendering or AI task. The NVIDIA's also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8, which halves the available bandwidth for data transfers from the CPU.

The verdict is simple: the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is the superior GPU for any compute-heavy, modern workload, and the AMD Radeon Pro 455 is only relevant for older Metal-specific applications on a Mac, or for low-power scenarios where the 35 W TDP and MXM form factor are non-negotiable. The data shows the NVIDIA's wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head tests, with the AMD winning zero. This is not a balanced matchup.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 10,336. The NVIDIA is 446.8% ahead.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 455 win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The head-to-head records show 2 tests, both won by the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile. The AMD's only additional benchmark is Geekbench Metal, which has no direct comparison to the NVIDIA in the database.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The NVIDIA has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA's memory bandwidth is 2.36 times higher.

Q: Which GPU has the higher TDP?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile has a 95 W TDP, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a 35 W TDP. The AMD's TDP is 67.4% lower.

Q: What is the architecture of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA uses Ampere on an 8 nm process (chip GA107, Samsung foundry). The AMD uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process (chip Baffin, GlobalFoundries). The NVIDIA's process node is smaller, but the AMD's die is smaller at 123 mm² versus the NVIDIA's 200 mm².

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 13,821, while the AMD Radeon Pro 455 has 12,831. The NVIDIA's average is 7.7% higher, but the AMD's average is based on only 3 tests (OpenCL, Vulkan, Metal), whereas the NVIDIA's average includes 9 tests (OpenCL, Vulkan, and PassMark suite).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The NVIDIA has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory (vs 2 GB of GDDR5). Memory bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s for the NVIDIA, and 81.28 GB/s for the AMD. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the memory clock differs: the NVIDIA's memory runs at 1,500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the AMD's runs at 1,270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA's memory clock is 18.1% higher and the effective data rate is 135% higher.

The shading unit count is 2,560 for the NVIDIA versus 768 for the AMD. Texture mapping units are 80 for the NVIDIA versus 48 for the AMD. Raster operation units (ROPs) are 48 for the NVIDIA versus 16 for the AMD. The NVIDIA's pixel rate is 80.98 GPixel/s, the AMD's is 13.68 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA's texture rate is 135.0 GTexel/s, the AMD's is 41.04 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 8.637 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA versus 1,313.3 GFLOPS for the AMD.

The TDP is 95 W for the NVIDIA versus 35 W for the AMD. The slot width is IGP for the NVIDIA versus MXM Module for the AMD. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for the NVIDIA versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the AMD. The AMD's release date is 2016-10-29, while the NVIDIA's is 2021-04-11.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is based on the GA107 chip, using the Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8 nm process from Samsung. It contains 8,700 million transistors on a die size of 200 mm², yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro 455 uses the Baffin chip, based on the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a die size of 123 mm², yielding a density of 24.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, which the AMD lacks entirely.

The NVIDIA's generation is labeled "Ampere-MW (Ax000)" and its predecessor is Quadro Turing-M, with a successor of Ada-MW. The AMD's generation is "Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series)" with no predecessor or successor listed. The NVIDIA's API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA's DirectX 12_2 allows for ray tracing and mesh shaders, which the AMD's 12_0 does not.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins in every benchmark it shares with the AMD. Specifically, it wins Geekbench OpenCL by 446.8%, Geekbench Vulkan by 334.2%, and the PassMark suite (G2D, G3D, GPU compute, DirectX 9/10/11/12) where the AMD has no recorded scores. The NVIDIA's wins are in compute, rasterization, and API coverage. Its higher shading unit count, TMUs, ROPs, and memory bandwidth make it the superior choice for 3D rendering, video editing, and any CUDA-heavy workload (though CUDA is not benchmarked directly here, the FP32 compute advantage is clear).

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 wins in the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 15,916, and no NVIDIA score exists. It also wins on power efficiency in terms of TDP: 35 W versus 95 W, meaning it draws 63.2% less power. For a laptop with a 35 W power budget, the AMD is the only viable option. The AMD's also wins on physical size, as it is an MXM Module, while the NVIDIA is an IGP (integrated into the motherboard package), which is a form factor difference that may affect upgradeability. The AMD's smaller die size (123 mm² vs 200 mm²) suggests it is cheaper to manufacture, but that is not a performance metric.

The AMD's average benchmark of 12,831 is 8.7% lower than the NVIDIA's 13,821, but the AMD's percentile rank is 52, only 3 points lower than the NVIDIA's 55. This suggests that in the broader database, the AMD is not as far off as the head-to-head scores imply, largely because the AMD's Metal score of 15,916 is competitive with the NVIDIA's PassMark G3D score of 9,611 (though these are different test types). The AMD's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (0% delta), which is a 2011 card, while the NVIDIA's closest rival is the AMD Radeon 660M (0.1% delta), a modern integrated GPU. The data places the NVIDIA in a modern mid-range bracket, while the AMD is stuck in a legacy performance bracket.