AMD Radeon PRO V620 vs NVIDIA RTX 6000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single available head-to-head benchmark in this dataset is the Geekbench OpenCL compute test, and the result is decisively lopsided. The NVIDIA RTX 6000D scores 388,405 points, while the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 128,580 points. That translates to a 202.1% delta in favor of the NVIDIA card — meaning the RTX 6000D delivers roughly three times the raw OpenCL compute throughput of the AMD part. This is not a marginal victory; it is a category-level gap.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RTX 6000D also posts a score of 3,522 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, a test the Radeon PRO V620 does not have a recorded result for in this data. The RTX 6000D's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 195,964, which places it in the 98th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon PRO V620, by contrast, averages 136,472 across its recorded tests, landing in the 96th percentile. While both are high-percentile performers, the absolute separation in average scores is substantial — a gap of roughly 59,500 points, or about 43.6% relative to the AMD card's average.

The closest rivals to the RTX 6000D help contextualize its position. The NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB sits 5.4% above it in average score, while the NVIDIA Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB trails by just 0.8%, and the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB is 4.7% behind. The RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 6.1% behind. This places the RTX 6000D squarely in the upper echelon of NVIDIA's compute lineup, trading blows with A100 variants. For the Radeon PRO V620, its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo is 0.5% ahead, the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 is 0.8% ahead, and both the NVIDIA A10M and RTX 4000 Ada Generation sit 0.9% ahead. The V620 is essentially at parity with that group, but that group is far below the RTX 6000D's tier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two cards is the primary driver of the performance disparity. The RTX 6000D is built on NVIDIA's Blackwell 2.0 architecture, using the GB202 chip fabricated on a TSMC 5 nm process. It packs 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The Radeon PRO V620 uses AMD's RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 21 chip on a TSMC 7 nm process. It contains 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, for a density of 51.5 million per square millimeter. The RTX 6000D therefore has roughly 3.4 times the transistor count and more than double the transistor density.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The RTX 6000D carries 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus, delivering 1.40 TB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon PRO V620 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a 2.6x advantage in memory capacity and a 2.7x advantage in bandwidth for the NVIDIA card. Clock speeds are closer: the RTX 6000D runs at 1992 MHz base and 2430 MHz boost, while the V620 runs at 1825 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost. The NVIDIA card's memory runs at 1560 MHz (25 Gbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for AMD.

Compute resources tell the same story. The RTX 6000D has 19,968 shading units, 624 texture mapping units, 192 ROPs, 156 RT cores, and 624 tensor cores. The Radeon PRO V620 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 72 RT cores — with no tensor cores at all. The NVIDIA card's FP32 throughput is 97.04 TFLOPS, which is 4.8x the V620's 20.28 TFLOPS. In FP16, the RTX 6000D again delivers 97.04 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the V620 reaches 40.55 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 466.6 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 281.6 GPixel/s for AMD, and texture rate is 1,516.3 GTexel/s versus 633.6 GTexel/s.

Other differences matter for deployment. The RTX 6000D uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the V620 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The NVIDIA card draws up to 600 W with a single 16-pin connector and a suggested 1000 W PSU; the AMD card draws 300 W with dual 8-pin connectors and a suggested 700 W PSU. The RTX 6000D has four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs; the V620 has no display outputs at all, indicating a compute-only role. Both cards are dual-slot, but the RTX 6000D is longer at 304 mm versus 267 mm, and wider at 137 mm versus 120 mm, while the V620 is thicker at 50 mm versus 40 mm.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 6000D wins in every head-to-head category where data exists. In Geekbench OpenCL, it is 202.1% ahead. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it posts a score of 3,522 — a result the V620 has no recorded entry for. The average benchmark score gap of 43.6% further reinforces NVIDIA's dominance in aggregate compute workloads.

The Radeon PRO V620's advantages are limited to non-performance attributes. It consumes half the power (300 W versus 600 W), which could translate to lower cooling requirements and simpler power delivery in dense server environments. Its 267 mm length makes it easier to fit in shorter chassis. The 2x 8-pin power connectors are more universally compatible with existing server PSU cabling than the 16-pin connector on the RTX 6000D. The V620 also benefits from being an end-of-life product with a 2021 release date, meaning it may be available in the used market — though pricing data is not available for this analysis.

For use cases, the RTX 6000D is clearly the choice for compute-heavy workloads: OpenCL acceleration, FP32 and FP16 matrix operations, ray tracing via its 156 RT cores, and tensor-core-accelerated AI inference. Its 84 GB memory capacity and 1.40 TB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets that exceed the 32 GB limit of the V620. The V620, with no display outputs, is strictly a compute or rendering node card; it cannot drive monitors. The RTX 6000D's four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs allow it to serve in visualization or workstation roles as well.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 6000D is decisively ahead. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 388,405 versus 128,580 for the AMD Radeon PRO V620, a 202.1% delta. Its FP32 throughput is 97.04 TFLOPS versus 20.28 TFLOPS for the AMD card.

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The RTX 6000D has 84 GB of GDDR7 on a 448-bit bus with 1.40 TB/s bandwidth. The Radeon PRO V620 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card offers 2.6x the capacity and 2.7x the bandwidth.

Q: Does the AMD card have any advantage over the NVIDIA card?

A: Yes, in power consumption and physical footprint. The V620 draws 300 W versus 600 W for the RTX 6000D, and it is shorter at 267 mm versus 304 mm. It uses two 8-pin connectors instead of a single 16-pin connector, and suggests a 700 W PSU versus 1000 W for NVIDIA.

Q: Can either card output video?

A: The RTX 6000D has four DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The Radeon PRO V620 has no display outputs, making it compute-only.

Q: How do these cards rank among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 6000D is in the 98th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 195,964. The Radeon PRO V620 is in the 96th percentile with an average score of 136,472.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card?

A: For the RTX 6000D, the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB is 5.4% ahead, the Tesla V100S PCIe 32 GB is 0.8% behind, the A100 SXM4 40 GB is 4.7% behind, and the RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 6.1% behind. For the V620, the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo is 0.5% ahead, the Radeon PRO W6800 is 0.8% ahead, and both the NVIDIA A10M and RTX 4000 Ada Generation are 0.9% ahead.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX 6000D outperforms the AMD Radeon PRO V620 by a wide margin in every measured compute benchmark. A 202.1% lead in OpenCL, a 43.6% lead in average benchmark score, and a 4.8x lead in FP32 TFLOPS leave no room for interpretation. The RTX 6000D also offers 2.6x the memory capacity, 2.7x the bandwidth, a newer PCIe 5.0 interface, and display outputs. Its 98th percentile ranking versus the V620's 96th percentile confirms the tier gap.

The Radeon PRO V620's case rests entirely on efficiency and deployment practicality. At 300 W, it uses half the power of the RTX 6000D's 600 W. It is 37 mm shorter, uses more common power connectors, and requires only a 700 W PSU. For organizations with power constraints, thermal limits, or dense server layouts, the V620 could be the pragmatic choice — provided the workload fits within 32 GB of memory and does not require tensor cores or display output.

For any workload that demands maximum compute throughput, large memory residency, or RT/tensor acceleration, the RTX 6000D is the clear selection from this data. Its nearest rivals are A100-class parts, and it trades blows with them. The V620, by contrast, sits at parity with mid-range Ada and RDNA 2 workstation cards. The RTX 6000D's launch MSRP is 8,565 USD, but no pricing data exists for the V620 to enable a cost comparison.

In short: the RTX 6000D is the performance leader by a landslide, while the V620 is a lower-power alternative for compute tasks that do not require the NVIDIA card's massive memory or tensor throughput. The benchmark data does not support any scenario where the V620 wins on performance. It only wins on power and size.