AMD Radeon PRO V710 vs AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents a stark contrast between these two AMD graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 is a workstation-oriented discrete GPU that sits in the 88th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, an integrated console-class part, lands in the 50th percentile. The V710 carries an average benchmark score of 58,657, whereas the Z2 Go has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, giving it an average score of zero.

The Radeon PRO V710 wins decisively in raw compute workloads. Its OpenCL score of 116,460 in Geekbench positions it as a high-throughput device for general-purpose GPU compute. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853 further confirms strong DirectX 12 rendering capability. The Z2 Go has no comparable scores recorded, meaning every measurable performance category goes to the V710.

The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU instead wins on integration and power envelope. It draws 28 W, operates with no power connectors, and outputs video through a single USB Type-C port. The V710 requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, a 450 W suggested PSU, and provides no display outputs whatsoever. For a system that needs a self-contained graphics solution without external power wiring, the Z2 Go is the only viable choice between the two.

The use-case split is therefore simple. The V710 is for compute and rendering tasks where a discrete card is already installed in a host system with adequate power delivery. The Z2 Go is for compact, low-power devices that need display output and basic graphics acceleration directly from the processor package.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Radeon PRO V710 uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on a Navi 32 chip with the codename Wheat Nas, fabricated on a 5 nm TSMC process. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on a Rembrandt+ chip, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. This generational gap explains much of the efficiency and feature divergence between the two.

The V710 integrates 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The Z2 Go integrates 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, at 63.0 million per square millimeter. The V710 is both a larger chip and a denser one, reflecting the more advanced process node and larger compute footprint.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The V710 deploys 3,456 shading units, 216 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, and 54 ray tracing cores. The Z2 Go halves that structure down to 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. Neither part reports tensor cores, so AI acceleration is not a differentiator in the data.

Clock behavior also diverges sharply. The V710 runs at a base clock of 1900 MHz with a boost of 2000 MHz. The Z2 Go has a much lower base of 800 MHz but boosts to 2700 MHz, a higher peak clock that helps close the gap in clock-sensitive workloads despite the massive difference in shader count.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The V710 uses 28 GB of GDDR6 across a 224 bit bus, delivering 504.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Z2 Go uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 across a 128 bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). The V710 has nearly five times the memory bandwidth, which matters heavily for large data sets and high-resolution rendering.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity exists despite the architectural gap. The V710 is built for a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface, while the Z2 Go lists no bus interface in the database, consistent with an integrated part that communicates over an internal fabric.

The V710 offers no display outputs at all, listing "No outputs" in the database. The Z2 Go provides a single USB Type-C output. The V710 consumes 158 W and requires a single-slot cooler, while the Z2 Go consumes 28 W with no dedicated cooler mentioned and no power connectors. The production status of the V710 is not listed, while the Z2 Go is marked as Active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the Radeon PRO V710 and the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. The wins counters for both items are zero. All comparative analysis must therefore rely on the standalone benchmark scores and architectural data recorded for each part.

The V710's Geekbench OpenCL score of 116,460 is the single most informative number in the comparison. The Z2 Go has no equivalent entry, so the V710 leads by the full margin of that score. Compute workloads that scale with shader count and memory bandwidth will favor the V710 overwhelmingly, given its 3456 shading units versus 768, its 504.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, and its 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 throughput.

The FP32 figures illustrate the scale of the gap. The V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS, while the Z2 Go delivers 4.147 TFLOPS. That is a 6.7x difference in raw single-precision compute. In FP16, the V710 also delivers 27.65 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the Z2 Go delivers 8.294 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The V710 leads FP16 throughput as well, though by a smaller 3.3x margin.

Pixel and texture rates reinforce the same pattern. The V710 achieves 192.0 GPixel/s and 432.0 GTexel/s. The Z2 Go achieves 86.40 GPixel/s and 129.6 GTexel/s. The V710 leads fill-rate-bound workloads by factors of 2.2x and 3.3x respectively.

The nearest rivals to the V710 in the database provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA P102-100 averages 58,528, putting the V710 0.2% ahead. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT averages 58,392, a 0.5% lead for the V710. The Intel Arc A570M averages 58,239, a 0.7% lead. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM averages 58,085, a 1% lead. The V710 is therefore clustered tightly with a set of mid-to-high-range GPUs, none of which it beats by more than 1% in average score. The Z2 Go has no nearest rivals listed in the database.

The absence of head-to-head results means no single benchmark directly compares the two parts. However, the standalone results and the architectural data make the performance hierarchy unambiguous. The V710 competes with discrete GPUs in the 88th percentile, while the Z2 Go sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Radeon PRO V710. It delivers 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 and 27.65 TFLOPS FP16, while the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.294 TFLOPS FP16.

Q: Does the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists no benchmarks for the Z2 Go, giving it an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking. The V710 has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 116,460 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Radeon PRO V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 on a 224 bit bus with 504.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU can connect to a display?

A: The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has one USB Type-C display output. The Radeon PRO V710 lists no display outputs in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Radeon PRO V710 has a TDP of 158 W, uses a 1x 8-pin power connector, and requires a 450 W suggested PSU. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: How does the Radeon PRO V710 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It leads the NVIDIA P102-100 by 0.2%, the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT by 0.5%, the Intel Arc A570M by 0.7%, and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM by 1% in average benchmark score.

The Verdict

The data points to two completely different products for two completely different roles. The Radeon PRO V710 is a discrete workstation GPU with serious compute resources: 3456 shading units, 28 GB of GDDR6, 504.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and 27.65 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. Its 88th percentile ranking and average score of 58,657 place it alongside established discrete GPUs like the NVIDIA P102-100 and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, which it edges by 0.2% and 0.5% respectively.

The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is an integrated part with much smaller resources: 768 shading units, 16 GB of LPDDR5, 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32. Its 50th percentile ranking and absence of recorded benchmark scores reflect its position as a low-power, entry-level graphics solution rather than a compute workhorse.

The V710 is the clear choice for any workload that depends on shader throughput, memory bandwidth, or ray tracing horsepower. Its FP32 output is 6.7x higher than the Z2 Go, its pixel rate is 2.2x higher, and its texture rate is 3.3x higher. It also carries the architectural advantage of RDNA 3.0 on a 5 nm process versus RDNA 2.0 on a 6 nm process. The lack of display outputs means it must be paired with a separate display solution, but for compute and rendering tasks in a server or workstation chassis, the data supports the V710 without qualification.

The Z2 Go is the only sensible pick when power and integration matter more than performance. At 28 W with no power connectors and a single USB Type-C output, it fits into compact systems where the V710 cannot operate at all. Its 2700 MHz boost clock is higher than the V710's 2000 MHz, which helps in lightly threaded or clock-sensitive scenarios, but its 4.147 TFLOPS ceiling limits it to modest graphics workloads.

There is no scenario in the recorded data where the Z2 Go outperforms the V710 in compute or rendering. There is also no scenario where the V710 can replace the Z2 Go in a low-power, display-capable, connector-free design. The database supports a simple conclusion: the Radeon PRO V710 for performance, the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU for integration.