AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 are both dual-slot, 300 W server accelerators aimed at professional workloads, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy between them, driven by distinct architectural choices in memory technology, compute layout, and feature support. This analysis compares the two based strictly on the provided benchmark and specification data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, which measures general-purpose compute performance across a wide range of tasks. In this test, the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB scores 207124, while the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 128580. This gives the A100 a decisive 61.1% advantage, making it the clear winner in this single head-to-head matchup.

This margin is substantial. To put it in context, the A100’s score places it in the 99th percentile against all GPUs, while the V620 sits in the 96th percentile. That three-percentile gap represents a significant tier difference in raw compute capability. The A100’s OpenCL result is also 5.7% higher than the NVIDIA RTX 6000D (195964) and 6.5% higher than the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB (194415), showing that it outperforms its closest workstation rivals by a healthy margin. Conversely, the V620’s score is nearly identical to its nearest competitors: it is only 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (135774), 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135396), and 0.9% behind both the NVIDIA A10M (135230) and NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135218). This suggests the V620 is well-positioned within its immediate performance class, but that class is far below the A100’s level.

The A100 also has a second benchmark result, but it is the same OpenCL score, so the head-to-head comparison remains limited to a single data point. However, the V620 does have an additional Geekbench Vulkan score of 144364, which is higher than its OpenCL score by about 12.3%. The A100 does not have a Vulkan result listed, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible.

Looking at the broader performance picture, the A100’s average benchmark score is 207124, while the V620’s average is 136472 — a difference of roughly 51.8%. This average incorporates all available tests, reinforcing the A100’s dominance in the data. The wins tally shows 1 win for the A100 and 0 for the V620, confirming that in every measurable head-to-head comparison, the NVIDIA card comes out ahead.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB than the AMD Radeon PRO V620 in OpenCL?

A: The A100 scores 207124 compared to the V620’s 128580, which is a 61.1% higher result. This is the only direct benchmark comparison available between the two cards.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO V620 have any benchmark advantage over the A100?

A: No. The data shows 1 win for the A100 and 0 wins for the V620 in head-to-head tests. The V620 does have a Vulkan score of 144364, but the A100 has no Vulkan result listed, so no comparison can be made in that API.

Q: How does each card rank against all other GPUs?

A: The A100 is in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, while the V620 is in the 96th percentile. This indicates the A100 sits in a higher overall performance tier.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The A100 has a memory bandwidth of 1.94 TB/s using HBM2e over a 5120-bit bus. The V620 has 512.0 GB/s using GDDR6 over a 256-bit bus. The A100’s bandwidth is roughly 3.8 times higher.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 and FP16 compute performance?

A: The A100 delivers 19.49 TFLOPS FP32 and 77.97 TFLOPS FP16 (4:1). The V620 delivers 20.28 TFLOPS FP32 and 40.55 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The V620 has a slight edge in FP32 (about 4% higher), but the A100 is far ahead in FP16 (about 92% higher).

Q: Do both cards support standard graphics APIs?

A: The V620 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The A100 has no listed DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support, indicating it is focused purely on compute rather than graphics rendering.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on different architectures from different generations. The NVIDIA A100 uses the GA100 chip based on the Ampere architecture, belonging to the Server Ampere (Axx) generation. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 uses the Navi 21 chip based on RDNA 2.0, belonging to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi II Series) generation.

Both are manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, but the chip designs diverge significantly. The A100’s GA100 die contains 54,200 million transistors on a 826 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 65.6M per mm². The V620’s Navi 21 die contains 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, for a density of 51.5M per mm². The A100 packs more than twice the transistors into a larger die with higher density.

The compute layouts are also very different. The A100 has 6912 shading units, 432 TMUs, and 160 ROPs, along with 432 tensor cores. The V620 has 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, and includes 72 ray tracing cores but no tensor cores. The A100’s tensor cores are a major differentiator for AI and deep learning workloads, while the V620’s ray tracing cores are aimed at graphics acceleration.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The A100 uses 80 GB of HBM2e with a 5120-bit bus and 1.94 TB/s bandwidth, which is typical for high-bandwidth compute accelerators. The V620 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is more common for graphics-oriented cards. The A100’s memory capacity is 2.5 times larger and its bandwidth is nearly four times higher.

In terms of APIs, the V620 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the A100 lists none. This reflects the V620’s hybrid compute-and-graphics design versus the A100’s pure compute focus. The A100 has no display outputs, and neither card has display outputs listed, so both are intended for server environments.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB is the superior performer in raw compute benchmarks, with a 61.1% higher OpenCL score and a higher percentile ranking (99th vs 96th). Its advantages in memory bandwidth (1.94 TB/s vs 512.0 GB/s), memory capacity (80 GB vs 32 GB), and transistor count (54,200 million vs 26,800 million) align with its higher benchmark results. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute performance, the A100 is the clear choice based on the numbers.

The AMD Radeon PRO V620, however, is not without its own merits. It has a slightly higher FP32 performance (20.28 TFLOPS vs 19.49 TFLOPS) and includes ray tracing cores and full graphics API support, which the A100 lacks. Its FP32 edge is modest — about 4% — but it shows that the V620 is not universally slower. The V620 also has a Vulkan score of 144364, which is higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting it may perform better in Vulkan-based applications, though the A100 has no Vulkan data for comparison.

The choice between these two depends on the specific workload. For pure compute tasks, especially those leveraging FP16 or tensor operations, the A100 is decisively ahead. For graphics-oriented tasks that use ray tracing or require DirectX/Vulkan support, the V620 is the only option with those capabilities. The A100’s end-of-life status and the V620’s end-of-life status mean both are legacy products, but the A100’s performance legacy is clearly stronger in the benchmark data.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node is the same (7 nm, TSMC), but the die size differs: the A100 is 826 mm² versus the V620’s 520 mm². Transistor counts are 54,200 million for the A100 and 26,800 million for the V620, with densities of 65.6M/mm² and 51.5M/mm² respectively.

Clock speeds are higher on the V620: its base clock is 1825 MHz and boost clock is 2200 MHz, compared to the A100’s 1065 MHz base and 1410 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ, with the A100 at 1512 MHz (3 Gbps effective) and the V620 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). However, the A100’s memory architecture is vastly different: 80 GB HBM2e on a 5120-bit bus versus 32 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. This results in bandwidth of 1.94 TB/s for the A100 and 512.0 GB/s for the V620.

Compute units differ: the A100 has 6912 shading units, 432 TMUs, and 160 ROPs, while the V620 has 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The A100 has 432 tensor cores and no ray tracing cores; the V620 has 72 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. Pixel rates are 225.6 GPixel/s for the A100 and 281.6 GPixel/s for the V620, while texture rates are 609.1 GTexel/s and 633.6 GTexel/s respectively.

FP32 performance is 19.49 TFLOPS for the A100 and 20.28 TFLOPS for the V620. FP16 performance is 77.97 TFLOPS (4:1) for the A100 and 40.55 TFLOPS (2:1) for the V620. Both have a TDP of 300 W, are dual-slot, and use PCIe 4.0 x16. The A100 uses an 8-pin EPS connector while the V620 uses 2x 8-pin connectors; both suggest a 700 W PSU. The A100 is 267 mm long and 111 mm high, while the V620 is 267 mm long, 120 mm high, and 50 mm wide. The A100 has no API support listed, while the V620 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB wins in every direct benchmark comparison available in the data. Its OpenCL score of 207124 is 61.1% higher than the V620’s 128580, and its 99th percentile ranking places it above the V620’s 96th. The A100’s strengths are clear: massive memory bandwidth (1.94 TB/s), large memory capacity (80 GB), and high FP16 throughput (77.97 TFLOPS). These characteristics make it suited for large-scale compute workloads, AI inference and training (thanks to its 432 tensor cores), and any application that can utilize its HBM2e bandwidth. Its higher transistor count and die size suggest more complex compute capability.

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 wins in specific specification categories that are not measured in the head-to-head benchmark. It has higher FP32 performance (20.28 TFLOPS vs 19.49 TFLOPS), higher pixel rate (281.6 GPixel/s vs 225.6 GPixel/s), and higher texture rate (633.6 GTexel/s vs 609.1 GTexel/s). It also has higher base and boost clocks (1825/2200 MHz vs 1065/1410 MHz). Critically, it includes 72 ray tracing cores and full graphics API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), which the A100 does not have at all. Its Vulkan score of 144364 is higher than its OpenCL score, indicating potential strength in Vulkan workloads. The V620 also has a smaller die and lower transistor count, which may imply simpler power delivery requirements despite the same 300 W TDP.

In practical terms, the A100 is the winner for compute-heavy tasks like scientific simulation, deep learning, and data processing where OpenCL performance and memory bandwidth dominate. The V620 is the winner for graphics rendering, ray tracing, and applications that require Vulkan or DirectX support, where its ray tracing cores and API compatibility are essential. The data does not show any benchmark where the V620 outperforms the A100, but the V620’s feature set covers use cases the A100 simply cannot address.