AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs NVIDIA A10M Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 and NVIDIA A10M are both end-of-life, dual-use workstation/server accelerators with no display outputs, aimed at compute and rendering workloads rather than traditional desktop use. Benchmark data shows the two cards are remarkably close in overall performance, with the NVIDIA A10M edging out the AMD Radeon PRO V620 by a slim 0.9% margin in average benchmark score (135,230 vs 136,472 for the AMD card, respectively, with the A10M listed as 0.9% behind the V620 in the AMD card’s nearest rivals list). Both cards sit at the 96th percentile among all GPUs, placing them in the upper echelon of available accelerators, but the head-to-head results reveal a more nuanced story than the aggregate scores suggest.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA A10M is the pick for raw compute throughput in a single, tightly defined benchmark. In the only head-to-head test recorded — Geekbench OpenCL — the A10M scores 135,230 against the Radeon PRO V620’s 128,580, a 4.9% deficit for the AMD card. That win gives the A10M a 1-0 record in direct comparisons. However, the AMD Radeon PRO V620 posts a higher average benchmark score overall (136,472) and a stronger Geekbench Vulkan result (144,364) than the A10M’s single OpenCL score, suggesting the AMD card may have an edge in Vulkan-based workloads, though no direct Vulkan comparison exists in the head-to-head data. For buyers prioritizing OpenCL compute, the A10M is the safer choice. For those who need more memory capacity or who target Vulkan APIs, the Radeon PRO V620 is the better fit. Neither card offers display outputs, so both are strictly for headless servers or render farms. The A10M achieves its results at a significantly lower power draw (150 W TDP vs 300 W TDP), making it the more efficient option per watt, though the data does not provide a direct performance-per-watt metric.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 is built on the Navi 21 chip using RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 26,800 million transistors into a 520 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 51.5 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA A10M, in contrast, uses the GA102 chip with Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It houses 28,300 million transistors on a larger 628 mm² die, with a lower density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. The AMD card’s smaller node gives it a density advantage, while the NVIDIA chip has more raw transistors overall.

The compute topology differs substantially. The Radeon PRO V620 has 4,608 shading units, 288 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 128 raster operation units (ROPs), alongside 72 ray-tracing cores. The A10M counters with 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 56 ray-tracing cores, and 224 tensor cores — the latter being absent from the AMD chip entirely. The AMD card’s higher TMU and ROP counts suggest better texture and pixel throughput, while the NVIDIA card’s higher shader count and tensor core presence indicate a design aimed at AI and deep learning tasks. Clock speeds also diverge: the Radeon PRO V620 runs at 1825 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the A10M operates at a much lower 975 MHz base and 1635 MHz boost, which the NVIDIA card compensates for with its wider shader array.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct benchmark comparison is Geekbench OpenCL, where the NVIDIA A10M wins decisively. The A10M scores 135,230, while the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 128,580, giving the NVIDIA card a 4.9% lead. This is a meaningful gap in a compute-oriented test, and it aligns with the A10M’s higher FP32 throughput of 23.44 TFLOPS against the AMD card’s 20.28 TFLOPS — a 15.6% advantage in raw floating-point performance. The A10M also holds an edge in memory bandwidth, with 500.2 GB/s versus the V620’s 512.0 GB/s, though the difference is negligible at 2.3% in the AMD card’s favor. However, the AMD card’s Vulkan score of 144,364 — which has no direct A10M counterpart in the head-to-head data — suggests that in Vulkan workloads, the Radeon PRO V620 may outperform its OpenCL result, potentially reversing the competitive balance in that API. The aggregate benchmark scores tell a similar story: the V620’s average of 136,472 is 0.9% higher than the A10M’s 135,230, meaning that across the available data, the AMD card is marginally ahead when considering all tests, even though it lost the single direct comparison.

Specification Differences

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 features 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s bandwidth with a memory clock of 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA A10M offers 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, achieving 500.2 GB/s bandwidth with a memory clock of 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective). The AMD card provides 60% more capacity and slightly higher bandwidth, while the NVIDIA card uses a wider bus but slower memory.

Power and physical design differ sharply. The Radeon PRO V620 has a 300 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested 700 W PSU. Its dimensions are 267 mm long, 120 mm tall, and 50 mm wide. The A10M is far more efficient: 150 W TDP, single-slot, using a single 8-pin EPS connector and a suggested 450 W PSU. It measures 267 mm long and 112 mm tall, with no width listed. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16 and have no display outputs. The AMD card has a higher pixel rate (281.6 GPixel/s vs 130.8 GPixel/s) and texture rate (633.6 GTexel/s vs 366.2 GTexel/s), while the NVIDIA card wins on FP32 (23.44 TFLOPS vs 20.28 TFLOPS) and FP16, where the A10M operates at 1:1 ratio (23.44 TFLOPS) versus the AMD card’s 2:1 ratio (40.55 TFLOPS), meaning the AMD card’s FP16 advantage is halved in real 1:1 workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory, and does it matter?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V620 has 32 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA A10M has 20 GB. The AMD card’s 60% larger capacity is critical for workloads exceeding 20 GB, such as large language models or complex 3D scenes, where the A10M would run out of memory.

Q: How do the two cards compare in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA A10M has higher FP32 throughput at 23.44 TFLOPS versus the AMD card’s 20.28 TFLOPS, a 15.6% advantage. This is reflected in the Geekbench OpenCL result, where the A10M leads by 4.9%, scoring 135,230 against 128,580.

Q: Is the Radeon PRO V620 faster in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Radeon PRO V620 scores 144,364 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is higher than the A10M’s OpenCL score of 135,230. While no direct Vulkan comparison exists, the AMD card’s Vulkan result suggests an advantage in that API, and its average benchmark score of 136,472 is 0.9% higher than the A10M’s 135,230.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V620 has a 300 W TDP and requires a 700 W PSU with two 8-pin connectors. The NVIDIA A10M has a 150 W TDP and requires a 450 W PSU with a single 8-pin EPS connector, making it much easier to integrate into existing servers.

Q: Do these cards support ray tracing and tensor operations?

A: Both support ray tracing, with the AMD card featuring 72 ray-tracing cores and the NVIDIA card having 56. However, only the NVIDIA A10M has 224 tensor cores, giving it a hardware advantage for AI inference and training tasks that the AMD card cannot match.

Q: Which card is better for a dual-slot vs single-slot environment?

A: The NVIDIA A10M is single-slot, making it ideal for dense server configurations where space is limited. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 is dual-slot, requiring more physical space but offering more memory and higher pixel/texture rates.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA A10M wins in compute-heavy server environments where power efficiency and space are paramount. Its 150 W TDP is half the AMD card’s 300 W, and its single-slot design allows for higher density in rack-mounted systems. The A10M’s 23.44 TFLOPS FP32 and 224 tensor cores make it the stronger choice for AI inference, deep learning, and scientific computing that relies on OpenCL or CUDA-like workloads — though the data only confirms OpenCL superiority. The A10M’s 4.9% lead in Geekbench OpenCL over the Radeon PRO V620 is the decisive metric for users running that API.

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 wins in scenarios requiring large memory footprints or Vulkan-based rendering. Its 32 GB memory capacity is 60% larger than the A10M’s 20 GB, enabling larger datasets and more complex scenes without swapping. The V620’s Vulkan score of 144,364 is 6.7% higher than the A10M’s OpenCL score, and its higher pixel rate (281.6 GPixel/s) and texture rate (633.6 GTexel/s) make it a stronger candidate for real-time graphics workloads, even if it lacks display outputs for direct rendering. For users prioritizing memory capacity and Vulkan performance, the Radeon PRO V620 is the better investment, despite its higher power draw and dual-slot requirement.