AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a dominant performance profile for the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile, which wins eight of the nine recorded tests. The most decisive victory comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA card scores 97,178 against the AMD card's 59,467, a lead of 63.4%. This is not a marginal advantage; it represents a massive gap in raw compute throughput that will be felt in any OpenCL-accelerated workload.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story, though with a smaller margin. The RTX A4000 Mobile posts 73,002 against the Radeon Pro 5700 XT's 56,593, a 29% advantage. This suggests the NVIDIA architecture maintains its lead even when the API shifts, which is relevant for cross-platform applications and games that leverage Vulkan.

Moving to the Passmark suite, the pattern holds in most categories. DirectX 11 shows a 49.4% delta, with scores of 127 versus 85. DirectX 10 comes in at 38.2% ahead, 105 versus 76. DirectX 12 narrows the gap considerably, 66 versus 59, an 11.9% lead, which indicates the AMD card is more competitive in the modern API. DirectX 9 is nearly a tie, 157 versus 153, a 2.6% edge for NVIDIA. The older API tests show that AMD's architecture holds up better in legacy DirectX workloads, but the margins are small enough to be irrelevant for most users.

The 3DMark-style Passmark G3D test, which represents overall gaming and 3D rendering performance, gives the RTX A4000 Mobile a 17.9% win, 14,796 versus 12,547. The GPU Compute test, which measures general-purpose compute, shows a 10.5% advantage, 6,394 versus 5,787.

The single loss for the NVIDIA card is in Passmark G2D, a 2D graphics and desktop compositing test. Here the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 810 against the RTX A4000 Mobile's 585, a 27.8% reversal. This is a notable outlier, and it suggests that for pure 2D desktop work or applications heavily reliant on 2D blitting, the AMD card has a distinct edge. However, for any 3D, compute, or modern API workload, the recorded data points consistently favor the NVIDIA part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies and process technologies. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile is built on Samsung's 8 nm process, using the GA104 chip with the Ampere architecture. The die measures 392 mm² and contains 17,400 million transistors, yielding a density of 44.4 million transistors per square millimeter. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT uses TSMC's 7 nm process with the Navi 10 chip and the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The AMD die is smaller at 251 mm², with 10,300 million transistors and a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter.

The transistor count difference is stark: the NVIDIA chip packs nearly 70% more transistors into a die that is 56% larger. This translates directly into a much higher shading unit count. The RTX A4000 Mobile has 5,120 shading units, while the Radeon Pro 5700 XT has 2,560, exactly half. Texture mapping units are equal at 160 each, but the ROP count differs, 80 for NVIDIA versus 64 for AMD.

A critical architectural split is in ray tracing and tensor cores. The NVIDIA Ampere GPU includes 40 dedicated RT cores and 160 tensor cores, which enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI/deep-learning features. The AMD RDNA 1.0 architecture has no dedicated RT cores and no tensor cores, making it reliant on compute shaders for ray tracing effects, which is far less efficient.

The FP32 compute throughput reflects this hardware disparity. The RTX A4000 Mobile delivers 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Radeon Pro 5700 XT manages 7.675 TFLOPS, a 124% advantage for NVIDIA. FP16 performance is more nuanced. The NVIDIA card sustains 17.20 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not double FP16 throughput. The AMD card achieves 15.35 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, effectively halving its FP32 rate to deliver FP16. This means in FP16 workloads, the AMD card is closer, but still behind.

Pixel and texture rates also favor NVIDIA. The RTX A4000 Mobile posts 134.4 GPixel/s and 268.8 GTexel/s, versus 95.94 GPixel/s and 239.8 GTexel/s for the AMD card. The memory subsystems are identical in bus width and bandwidth, both using 256-bit GDDR6 at 384.0 GB/s, but the capacities differ dramatically. The NVIDIA card has 8 GB, while the AMD card has 16 GB, which is a major consideration for large datasets or high-resolution textures.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in raw compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile is significantly faster. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 97,178 versus 59,467, a 63.4% lead. In Passmark GPU Compute, it leads by 10.5%, 6,394 versus 5,787.

Q: Does the AMD card have any advantage in the benchmark suite?

A: Yes, only in the Passmark G2D test, which measures 2D graphics performance. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 810 versus 585 for NVIDIA, a 27.8% advantage.

Q: How do the cards compare in DirectX 12 performance?

A: The NVIDIA card wins, but by a smaller margin than in other APIs. The RTX A4000 Mobile scores 66 versus 59, an 11.9% lead.

Q: Is the AMD card competitive in legacy DirectX 9 workloads?

A: The scores are nearly identical. The NVIDIA card posts 157 versus 153 for AMD, a 2.6% difference that is within noise for this type of test.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference and why does it matter?

A: The AMD card has 16 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA card has 8 GB. Both use a 256-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The extra capacity on the AMD card allows it to hold larger textures or datasets in VRAM without spilling to system memory.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 40 RT cores. The AMD RDNA 1.0 architecture has no dedicated RT cores, so ray tracing on the AMD card would rely on software emulation, which is significantly slower.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile | AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 7 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 17,400 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 392 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1140 MHz | 1243 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1680 MHz | 1499 MHz |

| Shading Units | 5120 | 2560 |

| ROPs | 80 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 40 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 160 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 17.20 TFLOPS | 7.675 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 17.20 TFLOPS (1:1) | 15.35 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 134.4 GPixel/s | 95.94 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 268.8 GTexel/s | 239.8 GTexel/s |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| TDP | 115 W | 130 W |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 300 W |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| Release Date | 2021-04-11 | 2020-08-03 |

The clock speeds show a mixed picture. The AMD card has a higher base clock at 1243 MHz versus 1140 MHz, but the NVIDIA card has a higher boost clock at 1680 MHz versus 1499 MHz. This means NVIDIA's card can reach higher peak frequencies under load.

The DirectX support level is a meaningful difference. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like mesh shaders and variable-rate shading. The AMD card only supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which lacks these advanced features.

The display output situation is also worth noting. The NVIDIA card's outputs are portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop design. The AMD card has no outputs at all, making it strictly an internal compute or rendering GPU, likely for use in a Mac Pro or similar system.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for most workloads. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile is the faster GPU in 3D rendering, compute, and modern API performance. It wins the overall benchmark average, posting 21,379 versus 18,685 for the AMD card, a 14.4% difference. The NVIDIA card also sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the AMD card sits in the 63rd.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT is not without merit. Its 16 GB of VRAM is double the NVIDIA card's 8 GB, which is critical for large-scale machine learning model training or massive texture sets. Its 2D performance is also superior, as shown by the 27.8% win in Passmark G2D. However, in every other test, it trails, often by significant margins.

The nearest rival data for the NVIDIA card places it just 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8970M and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL, while sitting 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000. For the AMD card, it is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 560X and 0.8% ahead of the AMD FirePro D500, while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 by 0.6% and the NVIDIA Tesla K80 by 1%. This context shows that the AMD card is competitive within its immediate peer group, but that peer group is a step below the NVIDIA card's performance tier.

The production status for both cards is end-of-life, so neither should be purchased as a new part. For anyone choosing between these two used or existing units, the NVIDIA card delivers substantially more compute performance per watt, with a TDP of 115 W versus 130 W for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile wins in every compute and 3D category. It is the clear choice for GPU-accelerated rendering, machine learning inference, video encoding, or any task that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan. The 63.4% OpenCL lead is decisive for productivity workloads. The 49.4% DirectX 11 lead and the 17.9% G3D lead make it the better choice for gaming, even though this is a professional GPU. The presence of RT cores and tensor cores means it can handle ray-traced content and AI-accelerated features that the AMD card cannot.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT wins in two specific scenarios. First, the 2D desktop and compositing workload, where its 27.8% G2D advantage indicates it will feel snappier for basic desktop use or 2D CAD applications. Second, any workload where 16 GB of VRAM is a hard requirement. The NVIDIA card's 8 GB will hit a wall sooner when loading large datasets, and the AMD card's additional capacity avoids that bottleneck, even if its raw throughput is lower.

For a Mac-based workflow, the AMD card's Metal benchmark of 51,272 is the only data point available for that API, and its lack of display outputs suggests it is designed to sit alongside another GPU. The NVIDIA card has no Metal score recorded, so its performance in that API is unknown. Users committed to Apple's Metal API may find the AMD card to be the safer choice, as the data cannot confirm NVIDIA's compatibility.

In practical terms, the decision comes down to two questions. Does the workload require more than 8 GB of VRAM? If yes, the AMD card is the only option. If no, the NVIDIA card is faster in almost every measurable way and uses less power. The 115 W TDP of the NVIDIA card versus 130 W for AMD also makes it easier to cool in a laptop chassis, which is relevant for sustained performance.