AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 are two very different products from different eras, yet their average benchmark scores place them close in overall performance. The GTX 780 Ti averages 24236 across three Geekbench tests, while the Vega 16 averages 23250, a margin of roughly 4%. However, this overall parity masks dramatic swings in individual tests, where each card dominates in specific API workloads. The data reveals two distinct personalities: the GTX 780 Ti is an older, power-hungry desktop part that excels in compute-style APIs, while the Vega 16 is a modern, efficient mobile GPU that delivers its best results in Apple's Metal framework.

Where Each One Wins

The performance split between these two cards is defined by the benchmark API rather than by any single workload. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti wins two of the three head-to-head tests, taking both OpenCL and Vulkan. Its OpenCL score of 27326 is its strongest result, and it beats the AMD card by a substantial 49.6% in that test. In Vulkan, the GTX 780 Ti scores 27238, which is 24.8% ahead of the Vega 16's 21832. These results suggest the older Kepler architecture retains a significant advantage in general-purpose compute and modern cross-platform graphics APIs, despite its age.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 wins decisively in Geekbench Metal, scoring 29650 versus the GTX 780 Ti's 18144. That is a 38.8% advantage for the AMD card, and it is the single largest delta in either direction across all three tests. This result is not surprising given the Vega 16's positioning as a Radeon Pro part designed for Mac systems, where Metal is the native graphics API. The data shows a clear pattern: if your workload relies on Metal, the Vega 16 is the clear choice; if it relies on OpenCL or Vulkan, the GTX 780 Ti dominates.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from entirely different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti uses the GK110B chip, built on Kepler architecture, and is part of the GeForce 700 generation. It is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 7,080 million transistors packed into a 561 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses the Vega 12 chip, built on GCN 5.0 architecture, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation. It is manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, though its transistor count and die size are not listed in the data.

The compute resources differ massively. The GTX 780 Ti has 2880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The Vega 16 has only 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having nearly three times the shading units, the GTX 780 Ti's raw throughput is not proportionally higher because of clock speed differences. The GTX 780 Ti runs at a base clock of 875 MHz and a boost clock of 928 MHz, while the Vega 16 has a lower base clock of 815 MHz but a much higher boost clock of 1190 MHz. The GTX 780 Ti achieves 5.345 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Vega 16 manages 2.437 TFLOPS. However, the Vega 16 supports FP16 at 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1 rate), a feature the GTX 780 Ti does not list.

Memory configurations are also fundamentally different. The GTX 780 Ti uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 336.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 307.2 GB/s. The Vega 16's memory runs at 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective), while the GTX 780 Ti's memory runs at 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The API support shows the Vega 16 is newer: it supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the GTX 780 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the entire comparison is in Geekbench Metal. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 29650, which is 38.8% higher than the GTX 780 Ti's 18144. This is a massive difference and indicates that the Vega 16 is heavily optimized for Apple's Metal API, likely due to its design as a Radeon Pro Mac component. For any Metal-based application, the Vega 16 is not just better; it is in a different performance class entirely.

The GTX 780 Ti returns the favor in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 27326 versus the Vega 16's 18268. This 49.6% delta is the largest margin of victory for either card in any test. OpenCL is a general-purpose compute API, and the GTX 780 Ti's 2880 shading units and higher FP32 throughput of 5.345 TFLOPS give it a clear edge in raw compute workloads. The Vega 16's 2.437 TFLOPS FP32 performance is less than half, which explains the significant gap.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 780 Ti wins again, scoring 27238 against the Vega 16's 21832, a 24.8% advantage. While not as dominant as its OpenCL win, this is still a comfortable margin. The GTX 780 Ti's Vulkan score of 27238 is nearly identical to its OpenCL score of 27326, suggesting consistent performance across these two APIs. The Vega 16's Vulkan score of 21832 sits between its Metal and OpenCL results, indicating it is more competitive in Vulkan than OpenCL but still trails the NVIDIA card significantly.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights only the fields where the two cards differ according to the data:

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | Not listed |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 875 MHz | 815 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 928 MHz | 1190 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 3 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 1024 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.6 GB/s | 307.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2880 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 240 | 64 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 55.68 GPixel/s | 38.08 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 222.7 GTexel/s | 76.16 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.345 TFLOPS | 2.437 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | Not listed |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.3 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2013-11-06 | 2018-11-13 |

| Launch MSRP | 699 USD | Not listed |

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti has an average benchmark score of 24236, which is 986 points higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16's 23250. This places the GTX 780 Ti in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, while the Vega 16 sits in the 68th percentile.

Q: Why does the AMD card win so decisively in Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 29650 in Geekbench Metal, which is 38.8% higher than the GTX 780 Ti's 18144. This is likely due to the Vega 16's design as part of the Radeon Pro Mac series, which is specifically optimized for Apple's Metal API in macOS environments.

Q: Is the GTX 780 Ti better in every non-Metal test?

A: Yes. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 780 Ti scores 27326 versus the Vega 16's 18268, a 49.6% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 780 Ti scores 27238 versus the Vega 16's 21832, a 24.8% advantage. The Vega 16 only wins in Metal.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The GTX 780 Ti has a TDP of 250 W and requires a 600 W suggested PSU with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors. The Vega 16 has a TDP of only 75 W and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no listed power connectors or suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 780 Ti has 336.6 GB/s of bandwidth using GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. The Vega 16 has 307.2 GB/s using HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus. Despite the Vega 16's wider bus and newer memory type, the GTX 780 Ti's higher memory clock of 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) gives it more bandwidth.

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

A: The GTX 780 Ti's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 with an average score of 24277 (0.2% higher), followed by the RTX 2080 SUPER at 24170 (0.3% lower). The Vega 16's nearest rival is the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23249 (0% difference), with the AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23273 (0.1% higher).

The Verdict

The data presents a clear use-case split. Choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti if your primary workloads are OpenCL or Vulkan based. It delivers 49.6% higher performance in OpenCL and 24.8% higher in Vulkan compared to the Vega 16. With an average score of 24236 and a 70th percentile ranking, it is also the slightly stronger overall performer. Its 5.345 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 336.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth make it a capable compute card, despite being end-of-life and drawing 250 W.

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 if you are working in a Metal-centric environment, particularly on Mac systems. Its 29650 Metal score is 38.8% ahead of the GTX 780 Ti, and its 4.874 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (2:1) suggests modern compute advantages that the older NVIDIA card cannot match. It is also dramatically more efficient at 75 W TDP versus 250 W, and it supports newer API versions including Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1). Its 68th percentile ranking is close to the GTX 780 Ti's 70th, so you are not sacrificing much overall performance for these advantages. The Vega 16 is the better choice for Metal users; the GTX 780 Ti is the better choice for everything else.