AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

# AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 and NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation are workstation-class graphics cards separated by nearly two years of design philosophy, yet their aggregate benchmark scores land within 0.9% of each other. The AMD card averages 136,472 across its benchmark suite, while the NVIDIA card averages 135,218, placing both in the 95th and 96th percentiles of all GPUs respectively. The data shows two very different architectural approaches achieving near-parity in overall compute, but with starkly contrasting specialization: the Radeon PRO V620 dominates Vulkan workloads by 16.6%, while the RTX 4000 Ada leads OpenCL by 12.3%. These are not interchangeable cards; each excels in environments that favor its unique hardware strengths.

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate that the AMD Radeon PRO V620 is the choice for Vulkan-centric workloads. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 144,364 versus the RTX 4000 Ada's 123,842 represents a 16.6% advantage, a substantial margin that suggests the RDNA 2.0 architecture's ray tracing and compute layout is better optimized for this API. For professionals running Vulkan-based renderers, game engines, or compute frameworks, the Radeon PRO V620's 32 GB of GDDR6 memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth provide additional headroom for large datasets, though the benchmark delta alone justifies the pick.

Conversely, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the superior option for OpenCL environments. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 146,593 outpaces the Radeon PRO V620's 128,580 by 12.3%. This, combined with its 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus the AMD card's 20.28 TFLOPS, points to an architecture that extracts more raw compute throughput from its shading units. The RTX 4000 Ada also boasts 192 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the Radeon PRO V620, making it the only choice for AI-accelerated tasks within this comparison.

The verdict splits cleanly: choose the Radeon PRO V620 for Vulkan-heavy pipelines and larger memory capacity; choose the RTX 4000 Ada for OpenCL, AI inference, and lower power consumption. The NVIDIA card's 130 W TDP versus the AMD card's 300 W TDP is a decisive operational difference, as is the single-slot form factor versus the dual-slot design. Neither card is universally faster; the 0.9% aggregate delta between them (with the AMD card slightly ahead) masks the significant per-API divergence.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon PRO V620 is built on TSMC's 7 nm process with RDNA 2.0 architecture, packing 26,800 million transistors into a 520 mm² die. The RTX 4000 Ada uses TSMC's 5 nm process with Ada Lovelace architecture, fitting 35,800 million transistors into a much smaller 294 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 121.8M per mm² for the NVIDIA chip versus 51.5M per mm² for the AMD chip, indicating the 5 nm node allows for significantly tighter packing.

The compute resources differ fundamentally. The Radeon PRO V620 fields 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, alongside 72 dedicated ray tracing cores. The RTX 4000 Ada counters with 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and only 64 ROPs, plus 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores. The AMD card has more TMUs and ROPs, which explains its higher pixel rate of 281.6 GPixel/s versus 139.2 GPixel/s, and texture rate of 633.6 GTexel/s versus 417.6 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA card's advantage lies in shading unit count and the presence of tensor cores.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The Radeon PRO V620 offers 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4000 Ada provides 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, yielding 360.0 GB/s. Clock speeds also differ: the AMD card runs at 1825 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA card runs lower at 1500 MHz base and 2175 MHz boost. Despite lower clocks, the RTX 4000 Ada achieves higher FP32 throughput (26.73 TFLOPS vs 20.28 TFLOPS) due to its larger shader count, and matches that figure for FP16 at 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1), whereas the Radeon PRO V620's FP16 is 40.55 TFLOPS (2:1).

The RTX 4000 Ada is a single-slot card with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the Radeon PRO V620 has no display outputs at all, making it a compute-only accelerator. Both support PCIe 4.0 x16 and identical API levels (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4). The NVIDIA card requires a single 16-pin power connector and a 300 W power supply, versus the AMD card's dual 8-pin connectors and 700 W PSU recommendation.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 144,364 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 16.6% higher than the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada's 123,842.

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada scores 146,593 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 12.3% higher than the AMD Radeon PRO V620's 128,580.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The Radeon PRO V620 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX 4000 Ada has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the Radeon PRO V620 has no display outputs while the RTX 4000 Ada has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Radeon PRO V620 has a 300 W TDP with dual 8-pin connectors and a 700 W suggested PSU, while the RTX 4000 Ada has a 130 W TDP with a single 16-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: How does the RTX 4000 Ada compare to its closest rivals in aggregate score?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada's average score of 135,218 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA A10M (135,230, 0% delta), 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800, and 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon PRO V620.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The process node is 7 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for NVIDIA, with transistor counts of 26,800 million versus 35,800 million and die sizes of 520 mm² versus 294 mm². Clock speeds show the AMD card with a 1825 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA card runs at 1500 MHz base and 2175 MHz boost.

Memory capacity is 32 GB for the Radeon PRO V620 versus 20 GB for the RTX 4000 Ada, with bus widths of 256-bit versus 160-bit and bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s versus 360.0 GB/s. The memory clock differs as well: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for AMD versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Compute unit counts show the AMD card with 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 72 RT cores, while the NVIDIA card has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 281.6 GPixel/s for AMD versus 139.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA, and texture rate is 633.6 GTexel/s versus 417.6 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance is 20.28 TFLOPS for the Radeon PRO V620 versus 26.73 TFLOPS for the RTX 4000 Ada. FP16 performance is 40.55 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD versus 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA. The TDP is 300 W versus 130 W, slot width is dual-slot versus single-slot, and power connectors are 2x 8-pin versus 1x 16-pin. The suggested PSU is 700 W versus 300 W.

Physical dimensions differ: the AMD card is 267 mm long, 120 mm high, and 50 mm wide, while the NVIDIA card is 245 mm long and 112 mm high with no listed width. Display outputs are absent on the AMD card but present as 4x DisplayPort 1.4a on the NVIDIA card. Release dates are November 2021 for AMD and August 2023 for NVIDIA, with the AMD card marked end-of-life and the NVIDIA card active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available Geekbench tests reveal a clear split. In OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada scores 146,593 against the AMD Radeon PRO V620's 128,580, a 12.3% delta in NVIDIA's favor. This is a decisive margin that aligns with the NVIDIA card's higher FP32 throughput of 26.73 TFLOPS versus 20.28 TFLOPS. The OpenCL result suggests that the Ada Lovelace architecture's shader-heavy design translates directly into compute performance, despite its narrower 160-bit memory bus and lower 360.0 GB/s bandwidth.

In Vulkan, the tables turn completely. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 144,364, while the RTX 4000 Ada manages only 123,842, giving AMD a 16.6% advantage. This is a larger delta than NVIDIA's OpenCL lead, and it is particularly notable given the AMD card's lower FP32 figure. The Vulkan result indicates that RDNA 2.0's geometry processing, with its 288 TMUs and 128 ROPs, handles the API's draw calls and pipeline stages more efficiently. The AMD card's higher pixel rate of 281.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 633.6 GTexel/s likely contribute to this Vulkan superiority.

Aggregate scores tell a story of near-parity. The Radeon PRO V620 averages 136,472 across both benchmarks, while the RTX 4000 Ada averages 135,218, a 0.9% difference in favor of AMD. Both cards sit in the top 5-6% of all GPUs, with the AMD card at the 96th percentile and the NVIDIA card at the 95th. The rival comparisons reinforce this tight grouping: the Radeon PRO V620 is 0.5% ahead of the W6800X Duo and 0.8% ahead of the PRO W6800, while the RTX 4000 Ada is essentially tied with the NVIDIA A10M (0% delta) and trails the same AMD cards by 0.1% and 0.4%.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO V620 wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads, as evidenced by its 16.6% benchmark advantage. This makes it the stronger candidate for applications that leverage Vulkan's low-level GPU access, such as modern game engines, real-time ray tracing renderers, and cross-platform compute frameworks. The card's 32 GB memory capacity and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth also give it a significant edge for large dataset processing, even if the benchmarks do not directly test memory-bound scenarios. Its higher pixel rate and texture rate further suggest advantages in rasterization-heavy tasks.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation wins in OpenCL environments, with its 12.3% benchmark lead. This positions it as the preferred option for OpenCL compute, which remains prevalent in scientific computing, video encoding, and various professional tools. The presence of 192 tensor cores, absent from the AMD card, makes the RTX 4000 Ada the only option for AI inference and machine learning workloads within this comparison. Its 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 performance, higher than the AMD card's 20.28 TFLOPS, indicates stronger general-purpose compute throughput.

Operational advantages also split the decision. The RTX 4000 Ada's 130 W TDP, single-slot design, and 300 W PSU requirement make it far easier to integrate into dense workstations or multi-GPU configurations. The Radeon PRO V620's 300 W TDP and dual-slot footprint demand more power and space, but its lack of display outputs suggests it is intended for dedicated compute servers where those factors are less critical. The RTX 4000 Ada's 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also make it the only choice for display-connected workflows. Ultimately, the data shows two cards with equal win counts (one each) but entirely different optimization targets: AMD for Vulkan throughput and memory capacity, NVIDIA for OpenCL efficiency, AI acceleration, and power-conscious deployments.