AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs AMD Radeon RX 6800S Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is the unequivocal performance winner in this comparison, dominating the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 across every shared benchmark test by margins ranging from 187.5% to 300.7%. The RX 6800S is a modern RDNA 2.0 mobile part built for high-performance gaming, while the Pro Vega 16 is an older, lower-power GCN 5.0 workstation-oriented chip; the data shows no scenario where the Pro Vega 16 emerges ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The performance split is entirely one-sided. The RX 6800S wins all three head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the largest victory in Geekbench OpenCL (300.7% ahead) and the smallest still being a massive 187.5% lead in Geekbench Metal. This indicates the RX 6800S is not just faster in compute-heavy workloads but also maintains its advantage across different API environments, including Apple's Metal graphics API where the Pro Vega 16 was specifically designed for Mac systems.

The Pro Vega 16 has no benchmark wins in any category. Its only statistical edge is a nearly identical percentile ranking (68th vs 69th for the RX 6800S), which reflects its position among all GPUs rather than direct performance. However, that single-point percentile difference is negligible given the enormous score gaps in actual testing. The data suggests the Pro Vega 16's value lies in its power efficiency and workstation feature set, not raw performance.

For use-case selection, the RX 6800S is the clear choice for gaming, 3D rendering, or any GPU-accelerated compute task where speed matters. The Pro Vega 16 might be chosen only for legacy software compatibility with GCN 5.0 architecture or for systems with strict power limits, since its 75 W TDP is 25% lower than the RX 6800S's 100 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations. The RX 6800S uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture with a 7 nm TSMC process, while the Pro Vega 16 uses the Vega 12 chip on GCN 5.0 architecture with a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process. This generational gap explains most of the performance disparity.

The RX 6800S has double the shading units (2048 vs 1024), double the texture mapping units (128 vs 64), and double the render output units (64 vs 32). It also features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the Pro Vega 16 completely lacks. The RX 6800S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro Vega 16 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The RX 6800S uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. Despite the Pro Vega 16 having a wider memory bus and higher raw bandwidth, the RX 6800S's newer memory technology and far higher clock speeds compensate. The RX 6800S also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, whereas the Pro Vega 16 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Transistor counts are only available for the RX 6800S (11,060 million on a 237 mm² die), while the Pro Vega 16's figures are not listed. The RX 6800S achieves a transistor density of 46.7M per mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal test shows the RX 6800S scoring 85,256 against the Pro Vega 16's 29,650, a delta of 187.5%. This is the closest margin between the two, which makes sense given that Metal is optimized for Apple platforms where the Pro Vega 16 was commonly deployed. Still, a nearly 2x advantage in Metal demonstrates that the RX 6800S is fundamentally faster even in the Pro Vega 16's most favorable environment.

Geekbench Vulkan widens the gap considerably. The RX 6800S scores 81,272 versus 21,832 for the Pro Vega 16, a 272.3% difference. Vulkan is a cross-platform API where architectural efficiency matters greatly; RDNA 2.0's modern design delivers well over three times the performance of GCN 5.0 in this workload.

The largest margin appears in Geekbench OpenCL: 73,202 for the RX 6800S against 18,268 for the Pro Vega 16, a 300.7% delta. OpenCL is heavily used in compute and workstation tasks, which is the Pro Vega 16's intended domain. The data shows the older GCN architecture is completely outclassed in general-purpose GPU compute by RDNA 2.0, with the RX 6800S delivering roughly four times the OpenCL performance.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the RX 6800S has additional benchmark results showing strong DirectX performance: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,689, Passmark G3D score of 15,908, and Passmark GPU Compute score of 6,144. The Pro Vega 16 has no comparable DirectX or Passmark results in the data, so those cannot be directly compared.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD Radeon RX 6800S if you need maximum performance in gaming, 3D rendering, or compute applications. It wins every benchmark by at least 187.5%, offers ray tracing support that the Pro Vega 16 lacks, has double the VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB), and supports the latest DirectX 12 Ultimate features. Its 69th percentile ranking among all GPUs and average benchmark score of 24,063 place it in a performance class near the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER (which scores 24,170, a mere 0.4% difference).

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 only if you have a specific requirement for its 75 W power envelope or need HBM2 memory characteristics. Its 307.2 GB/s bandwidth on a 1024-bit bus is actually higher than the RX 6800S's 256.0 GB/s, which might matter for certain memory-bound tasks. Its 68th percentile ranking and average score of 23,250 put it in the same overall performance tier as the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, 0% difference), showing it is roughly comparable to a mid-range mining-oriented card from a previous generation.

The data is unambiguous: for any performance-critical workload, the RX 6800S is the superior choice by a substantial margin.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800S, with 8.602 TFLOPS FP32 and 17.20 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), versus the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16's 2.437 TFLOPS FP32 and 4.874 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The RX 6800S delivers over 3.5x the FP32 throughput.

Q: How do they compare in ray tracing capability?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800S has 32 dedicated ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has higher raw bandwidth at 307.2 GB/s using HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6800S's 256.0 GB/s using GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. However, the RX 6800S has double the memory capacity (8 GB vs 4 GB).

Q: What is the performance gap in the closest benchmark?

A: In Geekbench Metal, the AMD Radeon RX 6800S scores 85,256 versus 29,650 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, a 187.5% difference. This is the smallest margin across all shared tests, but still represents a nearly 3x advantage for the RX 6800S.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both the AMD Radeon RX 6800S (released January 2022) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (released November 2018) are marked as end-of-life production status.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800S has a 100 W TDP, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a 75 W TDP. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with portable device-dependent display outputs, and the RX 6800S requires no power connectors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6800S | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 1800 MHz | 815 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2100 MHz | 1190 MHz |

| Game Clock | 1975 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB GDDR6 | 4 GB HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 1024 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 307.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 128 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 134.4 GPixel/s | 38.08 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 268.8 GTexel/s | 76.16 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 8.602 TFLOPS | 2.437 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 17.20 TFLOPS (2:1) | 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | 75 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2018-11-13 |