AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall benchmark scoring?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V620 records an average benchmark score of 136,472, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X records 80,959. The V620 sits at the 96th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 92nd percentile for the Vega 64X.

Q: Which GPU wins in the direct OpenCL head-to-head test?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V620 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 128,580 against 78,467 for the Vega 64X. That is a 63.9% advantage for the V620.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the Radeon PRO V620?

A: The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (average score 135,774, 0.5% behind), AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396, 0.8% behind), NVIDIA A10M (135,230, 0.9% behind), and NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218, 0.9% behind).

Q: What are the closest rivals to the Radeon Pro Vega 64X?

A: The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 (average score 81,995, 1.3% ahead of the Vega 64X), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 (79,842, 1.4% behind), NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB (79,605, 1.7% behind), and NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB (79,396, 2% behind).

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The Radeon PRO V620 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro Vega 64X supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The Radeon PRO V620 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro Vega 64X uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 is built on RDNA 2.0 with the Navi 21 chip, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X uses GCN 5.0 with the Vega 10 chip. The V620 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi II Series) generation, and the Vega 64X belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The V620 is fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the Vega 64X is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The V620 packs 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 51.5M per mm². The Vega 64X contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, for a density of 25.3M per mm². The V620 nearly doubles the transistor count on a slightly larger die, and the density difference reflects the newer process node.

The compute configuration also differs. The V620 has 4,608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. The Vega 64X has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The ROP count is particularly notable: the V620 has twice the ROPs of the Vega 64X. The V620 also includes 72 ray tracing cores, while the Vega 64X has no ray tracing cores at all; neither GPU includes tensor cores.

Clock speeds are significantly higher on the V620. The base clock is 1825 MHz with a boost clock of 2200 MHz, compared to 1250 MHz base and 1468 MHz boost on the Vega 64X. The memory clocks also differ: the V620 runs at 2000 MHz or 16 Gbps effective, while the Vega 64X runs at 1000 MHz or 2 Gbps effective. Despite the different memory types and bus widths, both GPUs achieve identical memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s.

The V620 is a discrete dual-slot card requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors with a 300 W TDP and a suggested 700 W power supply. The Vega 64X is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and a 250 W TDP, and no suggested PSU is listed. The V620 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Vega 64X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The V620 has no display outputs, whereas the Vega 64X's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the Radeon PRO V620 scores 128,580, and the Radeon Pro Vega 64X scores 78,467. The V620 wins by 63.9%, which is a substantial margin. The Vega 64X also has a Geekbench Metal score of 83,450, but the V620 does not have a recorded Metal result in the database, so no direct comparison is possible on that API.

Contextualizing the OpenCL result, the V620's score of 128,580 in that single test is slightly below its average benchmark score of 136,472, while the Vega 64X's OpenCL score of 78,467 is slightly below its average of 80,959. The gap in the head-to-head test is consistent with the gap in average scores: the V620's average is 68.6% higher than the Vega 64X's average. The head-to-head delta of 63.9% is a bit smaller than the average-score delta, but both point in the same direction.

The nearest-rival data reinforces the separation between the two tiers. The V620's closest rivals all sit within 0.9% of its average score, meaning it trades places with the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, Radeon PRO W6800, NVIDIA A10M, and RTX 4000 Ada Generation. The Vega 64X's closest rivals cluster around 80,000 to 82,000, with the Radeon PRO W6600 ahead by 1.3% and the RTX 5090, Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB, and Tesla P100 PCIe 12 GB trailing by 1.4% to 2%. There is no overlap between these two rival clusters: the slowest rival near the V620 (RTX 4000 Ada Generation at 135,218) is far above the fastest rival near the Vega 64X (Radeon PRO W6600 at 81,995).

The V620's pixel rate and texture rate are also far higher. The V620 achieves 281.6 GPixel/s and 633.6 GTexel/s, compared to 93.95 GPixel/s and 375.8 GTexel/s for the Vega 64X. The V620's FP32 throughput is 20.28 TFLOPS versus 12.03 TFLOPS for the Vega 64X, and its FP16 throughput is 40.55 TFLOPS versus 24.05 TFLOPS. Every throughput metric in the database favors the V620, which aligns with the benchmark results.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon PRO V620 as the stronger GPU overall. Its average benchmark score of 136,472 places it at the 96th percentile, and it wins the only direct head-to-head test by 63.9%. The Radeon Pro Vega 64X, with an average score of 80,959 at the 92nd percentile, is a capable part but belongs to a different performance class.

The V620 is the clear choice for workloads that rely on OpenCL compute, given the 63.9% lead in that specific test. It also offers a newer architecture, ray tracing support, a smaller process node, more memory (32 GB versus 16 GB), and a much higher boost clock. The Vega 64X's only listed advantages are its lower 250 W TDP and its integrated form factor with no external power connectors, which matters only in systems that require an IGP-style solution.

For users choosing between these two, the V620 is the better pick whenever discrete GPU performance, modern API support, or larger memory capacity are priorities. The Vega 64X remains relevant only in the specific context of portable or integrated deployments where its power connector-free design and lower TDP are decisive, and where the user is willing to accept roughly half the average benchmark score. The benchmark data does not support any scenario where the Vega 64X outperforms the V620 in raw compute.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ on nearly every major specification field. The V620 uses the Navi 21 chip on RDNA 2.0, while the Vega 64X uses Vega 10 on GCN 5.0. Process node: 7 nm TSMC versus 14 nm GlobalFoundries. Transistors: 26,800 million versus 12,500 million. Die size: 520 mm² versus 495 mm². Transistor density: 51.5M per mm² versus 25.3M per mm².

Clock speeds: the V620 has a base clock of 1825 MHz and boost of 2200 MHz; the Vega 64X has 1250 MHz base and 1468 MHz boost. Memory: the V620 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) memory clock; the Vega 64X has 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) memory clock. Both reach 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: the V620 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 72 ray tracing cores; the Vega 64X has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and no ray tracing cores. Pixel rate: 281.6 GPixel/s versus 93.95 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 633.6 GTexel/s versus 375.8 GTexel/s. FP32: 20.28 TFLOPS versus 12.03 TFLOPS. FP16: 40.55 TFLOPS versus 24.05 TFLOPS.

Power and form factor: the V620 has a 300 W TDP, dual-slot width, 2x 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested 700 W PSU; the Vega 64X has a 250 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs: none versus portable device dependent. Dimensions: the V620 is 267 mm long, 120 mm high, and 50 mm wide; the Vega 64X has no recorded dimensions. APIs: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6 on both, Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.3. Release dates: the V620 launched on 2021-11-03, the Vega 64X on 2019-03-18. Both are end-of-life. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 wins in every measured benchmark and throughput category. It wins the OpenCL head-to-head by 63.9%, has a 68.6% higher average benchmark score, and sits four percentile points higher. It wins on pixel rate (281.6 GPixel/s versus 93.95 GPixel/s), texture rate (633.6 GTexel/s versus 375.8 GTexel/s), FP32 (20.28 TFLOPS versus 12.03 TFLOPS), and FP16 (40.55 TFLOPS versus 24.05 TFLOPS). It also wins on memory capacity (32 GB versus 16 GB), ray tracing support (72 cores versus none), newer API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 versus DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.3), and a more modern 7 nm process.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X wins in the categories of power draw and physical integration. Its TDP is 250 W versus 300 W for the V620, and it requires no power connectors because it is an IGP. That makes it the only viable option in the database for systems that cannot accommodate a discrete dual-slot card with 2x 8-pin connectors. It also has a slightly lower transistor density and older process, but the recorded data shows no benchmark where it beats the V620.

Use-case split: choose the V620 for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads, for applications that benefit from 32 GB of memory, for ray-traced rendering, or for any task where the highest recorded scores matter. Choose the Vega 64X only for integrated or portable systems where a discrete card is impossible, where no external power is available, and where the 250 W TDP is the binding constraint. In every direct performance comparison recorded in the database, the V620 is ahead, often by more than half.