AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile Comparison

The benchmark data presents a stark generational and performance gap between the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16. The NVIDIA part, built on a newer architecture and process, demonstrates overwhelming superiority in every measured test, while the AMD part holds a distinct advantage only in power efficiency and physical integration. This analysis breaks down the specific numbers to clarify where each component stands.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison in the data is limited to two shared tests, but the results are decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 110877, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 manages only 18268. This translates to a delta of 506.9%, meaning the NVIDIA part delivers six times the raw compute performance of the AMD part in this API. This is not a marginal lead; it is a complete mismatch in computational throughput, reflecting the vast difference in shading units, memory bandwidth, and architectural efficiency.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similar pattern. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 88144, compared to 21832 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16. The delta here is 303.7%, meaning the NVIDIA part is roughly four times faster. While the gap is slightly narrower than in OpenCL, it remains enormous. The Vulkan result suggests that while both GPUs can execute the API, the NVIDIA Ampere architecture's hardware scheduling and compute resources are far more capable of feeding the workload.

Looking at the aggregate benchmark scores reinforces this picture. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 24763, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, with an average score of 23250, sits in the 68th percentile. Despite the massive head-to-head deltas, the average scores are closer because the AMD part’s available data is limited to Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, with the Metal score of 29650 providing a relatively strong data point. However, the NVIDIA part’s average is pulled down by its very low DirectX scores (e.g., 72 in DirectX 12, 115 in DirectX 10), which are likely artifacts of the mobile workstation driver environment or test methodology, not an indication of real-world gaming capability.

The data shows that in every test where both parts are measured, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile wins. The wins counter is 2 for the NVIDIA part and 0 for the AMD part. There is no benchmark in the shared set where the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 comes out ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile is the clear winner for any compute-intensive workload. Its 19.35 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a theoretical peak that the OpenCL and Vulkan scores confirm. For professionals running GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference, the NVIDIA part provides the necessary throughput. The 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is sufficient for large datasets and textures. The presence of 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores also gives it capabilities in ray tracing and AI-accelerated tasks that the AMD part simply does not have.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16’s only victory is in power draw and physical form factor. Its TDP is 75 W, compared to 150 W for the NVIDIA part. This means it generates less heat and requires less power, making it suitable for thinner, lighter laptops with smaller power delivery systems. Its slot width is listed as "IGP," which indicates it is an integrated graphics processor, likely soldered to the motherboard. The NVIDIA part has "None" for power connectors, suggesting it draws power through the motherboard slot, but its higher TDP still necessitates a more robust cooling solution. For a user who prioritizes battery life and portability over absolute performance, the AMD part is the more practical choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different design philosophies and eras. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile uses the GA104 chip based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4M per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses the Vega 12 chip based on the older GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The data does not list transistor count or die size for the AMD part, but the larger process node suggests a less dense design.

The NVIDIA part has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. It also includes 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, which are dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations. The AMD part has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores listed. This difference in raw compute units is the primary driver of the performance gap.

Memory architecture also differs significantly. The NVIDIA part uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 448.0 GB/s. The AMD part uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a very wide 1024-bit bus, which achieves 307.2 GB/s. The HBM2 is more energy-efficient per byte, but the GDDR6 implementation on the NVIDIA part has higher total bandwidth and four times the capacity.

Clock speeds tell a story of efficiency. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1575 MHz. The AMD part has a base of 815 MHz and a boost of 1190 MHz. Despite a higher core count, the NVIDIA part boosts significantly higher, demonstrating the architectural efficiency of Ampere over GCN. The FP32 and FP16 rates confirm this: the NVIDIA part lists FP32 at 19.35 TFLOPS and FP16 at 19.35 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the AMD part lists FP32 at 2.437 TFLOPS and FP16 at 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA part's 1:1 FP16 rate is superior for workloads that can use half-precision.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 110877, which is 506.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16’s score of 18268.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 have more memory bandwidth?

A: No. While it uses HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, its total bandwidth is 307.2 GB/s, which is lower than the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile’s 448.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a TDP of 75 W, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has a TDP of 150 W.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The data lists no RT cores for the AMD part, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile includes 48 RT cores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has 17,400 million transistors. The transistor count for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 is not listed.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 24763, and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 has an average of 23250.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two parts:

• Chip: NVIDIA uses GA104, AMD uses Vega 12.
• Architecture: NVIDIA uses Ampere, AMD uses GCN 5.0.
• Generation: NVIDIA is Ampere-MW (Ax000), AMD is Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series).
• Process Node: NVIDIA is 8 nm, AMD is 14 nm.
• Foundry: NVIDIA uses Samsung, AMD uses GlobalFoundries.
• Transistors: NVIDIA has 17,400 million, AMD is not listed.
• Die Size: NVIDIA is 392 mm², AMD is not listed.
• Transistor Density: NVIDIA is 44.4M / mm², AMD is not listed.
• Base Clock: NVIDIA is 900 MHz, AMD is 815 MHz.
• Boost Clock: NVIDIA is 1575 MHz, AMD is 1190 MHz.
• Memory Clock: NVIDIA is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), AMD is 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: NVIDIA is 16 GB, AMD is 4 GB.
• Memory Type: NVIDIA is GDDR6, AMD is HBM2.
• Memory Bus Width: NVIDIA is 256 bit, AMD is 1024 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: NVIDIA is 448.0 GB/s, AMD is 307.2 GB/s.
• Shading Units: NVIDIA has 6144, AMD has 1024.
• TMUs: NVIDIA has 192, AMD has 64.
• ROPs: NVIDIA has 96, AMD has 32.
• RT Cores: NVIDIA has 48, AMD has none.
• Tensor Cores: NVIDIA has 192, AMD has none.
• Pixel Rate: NVIDIA is 151.2 GPixel/s, AMD is 38.08 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: NVIDIA is 302.4 GTexel/s, AMD is 76.16 GTexel/s.
• FP32: NVIDIA is 19.35 TFLOPS, AMD is 2.437 TFLOPS.
• FP16: NVIDIA is 19.35 TFLOPS (1:1), AMD is 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1).
• TDP: NVIDIA is 150 W, AMD is 75 W.
• Slot Width: NVIDIA is not listed, AMD is IGP.
• Bus Interface: NVIDIA is PCIe 4.0 x16, AMD is PCIe 3.0 x16.
• DirectX Support: NVIDIA is 12 Ultimate (12_2), AMD is 12 (12_1).
• Vulkan Support: NVIDIA is 1.4, AMD is 1.3.
• Release Date: NVIDIA is 2021-04-11, AMD is 2018-11-13.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile is the superior performer in every measurable category. Its 506.9% lead in OpenCL and 303.7% lead in Vulkan are not incremental improvements; they are generational leaps. For any user who needs to run compute-heavy applications, process large datasets, or work with real-time 3D graphics, the NVIDIA part is the only choice between these two. The 16 GB of memory and the presence of RT and tensor cores future-proof it for workloads that are just becoming mainstream.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 is for a different user entirely. Its 75 W TDP and IGP form factor mean it can be placed in a laptop that is smaller, quieter, and has better battery life. It is a part for light productivity, media playback, and basic graphics acceleration where the priority is the overall system experience, not raw GPU performance. Its 4 GB of HBM2 memory is sufficient for the integrated use case, but it will quickly become a bottleneck for professional work.

The percentile rankings show the NVIDIA part at 70th and the AMD part at 68th, which seems close. However, this is a statistical artifact of the test suites. The NVIDIA part’s average score is dragged down by its DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 results, which are unusually low. The AMD part’s average is based on a narrower set of tests that include its strong Metal showing. In the shared tests, the gap is massive. The data suggests that the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile is a professional workstation GPU, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 is an integrated solution for a Mac. Choose the NVIDIA part for work; choose the AMD part for portability.