AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 are both end-of-life, low-power graphics solutions aimed at different segments, but the benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy between them. The GTX 1630 wins both head-to-head compute tests, yet the Radeon Pro Vega 16 counters with a higher raw specification count in several areas and a distinct advantage in a specific API benchmark. This analysis breaks down the data to determine which card suits which workload, based strictly on the provided metrics.

The Verdict

Based on the head-to-head benchmark results, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is the stronger performer in general compute workloads. It leads the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 by a substantial 36.1% in the Geekbench OpenCL test (24858 vs 18268) and maintains a 8.5% lead in the Geekbench Vulkan test (23695 vs 21832). This means the GTX 1630 secures a clear 2-0 victory in the head-to-head comparison. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan applications, the GTX 1630 is the definitive choice.

However, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is not without merit. Its sole benchmark win comes in the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 29650, a figure that the GTX 1630 cannot match as it has no Metal benchmark score in the data. This makes the Pro Vega 16 the only option for users whose software ecosystem relies on Apple's Metal API. Furthermore, the Pro Vega 16 has a higher average benchmark score (23250 vs 24277 for the GTX 1630) when considering all reported tests, though this is skewed by its participation in the Metal test. The GTX 1630 also holds a higher percentile ranking (70th vs 68th), indicating it sits above a larger portion of the overall GPU performance distribution. The verdict is simple: choose the GTX 1630 for cross-platform compute and gaming APIs, and choose the Radeon Pro Vega 16 specifically for Metal-based workflows.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is significantly faster, scoring 24858 compared to the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16's 18268. This represents a 36.1% performance advantage for the GTX 1630.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 win any benchmark against the GTX 1630?

A: Yes. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 29650 in the Geekbench Metal benchmark. The GTX 1630 has no entry for this test, so this is a clear win for the AMD card in Metal-specific applications.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 has a higher average benchmark score of 24277, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has an average score of 23250, placing it in the 68th percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card based on average score?

A: The GTX 1630's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, with an average score of 24236 and a 0.2% delta. The Radeon Pro Vega 16's closest rival is the NVIDIA P106-100, with an average score of 23249 and a 0% delta.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a significantly higher memory bandwidth of 307.2 GB/s, due to its 1024-bit HBM2 memory bus. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 has a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s using a 64-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 has a much higher boost clock of 1785 MHz, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16's boost clock of 1190 MHz.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different architectural approaches from their respective manufacturers. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 is built on the Turing architecture, using the TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 utilizes the GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 12 chip, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process node difference gives the GTX 1630 a manufacturing advantage, allowing for a transistor density of 23.5M / mm² on a 200 mm² die with 4,700 million transistors, while the Vega 16's transistor count and die size are not listed in the data.

The compute core configurations also differ substantially. The GTX 1630 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The Radeon Pro Vega 16, on the other hand, doubles these counts with 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives the Vega 16 a theoretical peak pixel rate of 38.08 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 76.16 GTexel/s, both higher than the GTX 1630's 28.56 GPixel/s and 57.12 GTexel/s. Neither card features dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, as those fields are null for both.

Memory architecture is another key differentiator. The GTX 1630 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, resulting in 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a massively wide 1024-bit bus, yielding over three times the bandwidth at 307.2 GB/s. The Vega 16 also has a different API support profile, offering Vulkan 1.3 compared to the GTX 1630's Vulkan 1.4, though both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. Finally, the GTX 1630 is a discrete, single-slot card with display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with portable-device-dependent outputs, reflecting its intended use in mobile Apple systems.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two cards reveal distinct differences in their core configurations and physical characteristics. The most significant divergence lies in the memory subsystem: the GTX 1630 features a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro Vega 16 features a 1024-bit bus with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth. Both have 4 GB of memory, but the types differ (GDDR6 vs HBM2). Clock speeds are also notably different, with the GTX 1630 running at a base of 1740 MHz and boost of 1785 MHz, while the Vega 16 runs at a much lower base of 815 MHz and boost of 1190 MHz. Memory clock speeds are listed as 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card and 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) for the AMD card.

The compute unit counts are doubled in the AMD card, with 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, versus the GTX 1630's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This leads to higher theoretical fill rates for the Vega 16: 38.08 GPixel/s pixel rate and 76.16 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to 28.56 GPixel/s and 57.12 GTexel/s for the GTX 1630. The Vega 16 also has a higher FP32 throughput at 2.437 TFLOPS and FP16 at 4.874 TFLOPS, versus the GTX 1630's 1.828 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.656 TFLOPS FP16. Power consumption is listed as 75 W for both, but the GTX 1630 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the Vega 16 is an IGP with no listed power connector or PSU requirements. The GTX 1630 also has defined physical dimensions (145 mm length), while the Vega 16's dimensions are not listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data provides a clear, if narrow, picture of performance. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 delivers a score of 24858, decisively beating the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16's 18268. This 36.1% margin is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any shared test, indicating a significant advantage for the GTX 1630 in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL. The GTX 1630's higher clock speeds and newer architecture appear to be the driving factor here, as its lower shading unit count is more than compensated for by its efficiency.

In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the margin narrows considerably. The GTX 1630 scores 23695 against the Vega 16's 21832, a win by 8.5%. While this is still a victory for the NVIDIA card, the smaller delta suggests that the Vega 16's higher theoretical compute throughput (2.437 TFLOPS FP32 vs 1.828 TFLOPS) and superior memory bandwidth help it close the gap in a lower-level graphics API. The only other benchmark data point is the Geekbench Metal test, where the Vega 16 scores 29650; the GTX 1630 has no score for this test, making it a default win for the AMD card and a strong indicator of its intended ecosystem.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 wins in cross-platform compute and graphics APIs. The data shows decisive victories in both OpenCL (36.1% lead) and Vulkan (8.5% lead). This makes it the superior choice for users running applications that rely on these widely supported APIs, including most Windows and Linux software, game engines, and general-purpose GPU compute workloads. Its higher percentile ranking (70th vs 68th) and higher average benchmark score (24277 vs 23250) across all tests further solidify its position as the better all-round performer in a mixed workload.

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 wins in Metal-based environments and bandwidth-heavy tasks. Its score of 29650 in the Geekbench Metal benchmark is its primary victory, making it the only viable option for software that exclusively uses Apple's Metal API, which is common in macOS applications. Furthermore, its massive memory bandwidth advantage (307.2 GB/s vs 96.00 GB/s) and higher shading unit count (1024 vs 512) suggest it could have an edge in specific memory-bound or shader-heavy workloads, even if the overall compute benchmarks do not reflect this. Its status as an IGP with portable-device-dependent outputs also indicates it is designed for a specific, integrated mobile platform, where its performance is more relevant than a discrete card comparison.