AMD Radeon PRO V710 vs NVIDIA CMP 30HX Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has a higher average benchmark score of 63,842 compared to the AMD Radeon PRO V710’s 58,657. The NVIDIA card also ranks in the 89th percentile against all GPUs, one point ahead of the AMD card’s 88th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 wins decisively, scoring 116,460 versus the NVIDIA CMP 30HX’s 65,199. That is a 44% advantage for the AMD card in this specific compute workload.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 224-bit bus with 504.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has a transistor density of 81.2M per mm², which is significantly higher than the NVIDIA CMP 30HX’s 23.2M per mm². This is due to the AMD card’s 5 nm process node compared to NVIDIA’s 12 nm node.

Q: Are the nearest rivals for each card different in performance?

A: Yes. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP with a delta of 0%, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710’s closest rival is the NVIDIA P102-100 with a delta of 0.2%.

Q: What is the power connector and slot requirement for each?

A: Both cards use a single 8-pin power connector. However, the NVIDIA CMP 30HX is a dual-slot card, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is a single-slot card.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX is built on the Turing architecture using the TU116 chip, manufactured on TSMC’s 12 nm process. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.2M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon PRO V710 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, codenamed Wheat Nas, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process. This newer node allows AMD to pack 28,100 million transistors onto a 346 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 81.2M per mm² — roughly 3.5 times denser than the NVIDIA chip.

The compute resources differ substantially. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 more than doubles the shading units to 3,456, with 216 TMUs and 96 ROPs. Additionally, the AMD card includes 54 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the NVIDIA card. Neither card has tensor cores listed.

Clock speeds favor AMD as well. The Radeon PRO V710 has a base clock of 1900 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz, compared to the CMP 30HX’s 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost. Memory speeds also differ, with AMD running at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus NVIDIA’s 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The bus interface is another major architectural divide. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 1.0 x4, a severely limited interface, while the AMD card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, providing far greater bandwidth for data transfer. Both cards have no display outputs, reflecting their compute/mining focus. API support differs as well: NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison contains only one shared benchmark: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the AMD Radeon PRO V710 delivers a score of 116,460, while the NVIDIA CMP 30HX scores 65,199. That translates to a 44% delta in favor of the AMD card. This is a massive margin, indicating that in raw compute throughput, the RDNA 3.0 architecture with its 3,456 shading units and 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 performance completely outclasses the older Turing design with 1,408 shading units and 5.027 TFLOPS FP32.

The NVIDIA card does have its own benchmark results — 65,199 in Geekbench OpenCL and 62,484 in Geekbench Vulkan — which show it performs well in both compute APIs. However, against the AMD card in the only overlapping test, it falls far behind. The AMD card also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853, a test the NVIDIA card has no results for.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the picture shifts. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX averages 63,842 across its benchmarks, while the AMD Radeon PRO V710 averages 58,657. This discrepancy arises because the AMD card’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 853 drags down its average, despite its dominant OpenCL showing. The NVIDIA card’s two scores are relatively close, so its average remains higher.

Specification Differences

The most glaring difference is memory capacity: the AMD Radeon PRO V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA CMP 30HX has only 6 GB. Memory bandwidth also favors AMD at 504.0 GB/s versus 336.0 GB/s. The memory bus width is 224-bit for AMD and 192-bit for NVIDIA.

Compute throughput is starkly different. The AMD card delivers 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 and the same 27.65 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card delivers 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.05 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s for AMD versus 85.68 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 432.0 GTexel/s for AMD versus 157.1 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Power and physical specifications differ as well. The AMD card has a TDP of 158 W, while the NVIDIA card has a TDP of 125 W. The NVIDIA card requires a 300 W suggested PSU, while AMD recommends 450 W. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot with dimensions of 229 mm length, 111 mm height, and 35 mm width. The AMD card is single-slot with no listed dimensions. Both use a single 8-pin power connector.

The process node and die size differ: 12 nm and 284 mm² for NVIDIA versus 5 nm and 346 mm² for AMD. The transistor counts are 6,600 million versus 28,100 million. The bus interface differs significantly: PCIe 1.0 x4 for NVIDIA versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD.

Release dates and statuses also differ. The NVIDIA card was released on February 24, 2021, and is end-of-life with a launch MSRP of 799 USD. The AMD card was released on October 2, 2024, has no launch MSRP listed, and has no production status specified. The AMD card’s predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between two very different products. If the priority is raw compute performance in OpenCL workloads, the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is the unequivocal choice. Its 116,460 OpenCL score represents a 44% advantage over the NVIDIA CMP 30HX, and its 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is more than five times higher than the NVIDIA card’s 5.027 TFLOPS. The AMD card also offers vastly more memory — 28 GB versus 6 GB — and significantly higher bandwidth at 504.0 GB/s. For memory-intensive compute tasks, this is a decisive advantage.

However, the NVIDIA CMP 30HX holds a higher average benchmark score of 63,842 versus 58,657, ranking in the 89th percentile versus the AMD card’s 88th. This suggests that in a broader set of workloads, the NVIDIA card may be more consistent. Its lower TDP of 125 W also makes it more power-efficient in absolute terms, and its smaller 229 mm length may fit in more compact systems.

The AMD card’s single-slot design is a physical advantage for dense compute installations, while the NVIDIA card’s dual-slot footprint is less flexible. The AMD card also benefits from a modern PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, whereas the NVIDIA card is limited to PCIe 1.0 x4, which could bottleneck data transfer in certain scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon PRO V710 wins in: Raw compute performance. The 44% OpenCL lead is the headline result. The 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 throughput, combined with 28 GB of memory and 504.0 GB/s bandwidth, makes it the clear choice for GPU compute workloads that can utilize its resources. The 54 ray tracing cores add capability the NVIDIA card completely lacks. Its single-slot design and PCIe 4.0 x16 interface are also advantages for server and workstation integration.

NVIDIA CMP 30HX wins in: Consistency and power efficiency. Its average benchmark score of 63,842 is higher than the AMD card’s 58,657, and its 89th percentile ranking edges out AMD’s 88th. The 125 W TDP is lower than AMD’s 158 W, meaning less power draw for the system. Its 229 mm length is compact, and the 300 W suggested PSU is more modest than the 450 W recommendation for AMD. For users prioritizing a balanced profile with lower power requirements, the NVIDIA card is the more logical pick.

For workloads specifically leveraging Vulkan, the NVIDIA card’s 62,484 Geekbench Vulkan score indicates solid performance, though there is no comparable AMD Vulkan score in this data set to directly compare. The AMD card’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 853 is its only other benchmark, and without a NVIDIA equivalent, it remains an isolated data point.