AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The recorded data shows the AMD part, released in late 2018, achieves a higher average benchmark score of 27839 compared to 24236 for the NVIDIA card from late 2013. This places the Radeon Pro Vega 20 at the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, while the GeForce GTX 780 Ti sits at the 70th percentile. However, the benchmark results reveal a more nuanced picture than the overall average suggests, with each card winning in different API workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 dominates in the Metal graphics API, a workload that heavily favors its modern architecture. In the geekbench_metal test, the AMD card scores 30427, which is a substantial 67.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti's score of 18144. This is the single largest margin of victory across all three head-to-head comparisons, and it highlights the AMD card's strength in Apple-centric ecosystems and modern graphics workloads that leverage Metal's low-level access to GPU hardware.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, despite being the older product, wins in the other two benchmark categories. In geekbench_opencl, the NVIDIA card scores 27326 against the AMD card's 26679, a 2.4% advantage. The margin is slightly larger in geekbench_vulkan, where NVIDIA scores 27238 versus AMD's 26410, representing a 3% lead. While these victories are narrow compared to AMD's Metal dominance, they demonstrate that the older Kepler architecture retains competitive OpenCL and Vulkan performance, likely due to its much higher raw shader count and memory bandwidth.

The overall win count favors NVIDIA at 2 wins out of 3 head-to-head tests, but the magnitude of AMD's Metal victory carries more weight in the average score calculation. The data indicates that the Radeon Pro Vega 20 is the better choice for Metal-centric applications, while the GeForce GTX 780 Ti holds a slight edge in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. For users prioritizing cross-platform compute or Vulkan gaming, the NVIDIA card's consistency across these two APIs makes it a viable option despite its age.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs embody fundamentally different design philosophies separated by two process node generations. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process using the GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 12 chip. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti uses TSMC's 28 nm process with the Kepler architecture and the GK110B chip. This process node difference has profound implications for efficiency: the AMD card draws only 100 W while the NVIDIA card consumes 250 W, making the AMD part 2.5 times more power-efficient on paper.

The transistor counts and die sizes tell a story of design trade-offs. The NVIDIA GK110B packs 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The AMD Vega 12's transistor count is not recorded, but its 14 nm process and smaller footprint suggest a more modern, denser implementation. The NVIDIA card's massive die was designed for raw compute throughput, while AMD's approach focuses on memory bandwidth efficiency and power management.

Memory architecture represents the most striking difference. The AMD card uses 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 189.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, achieving a higher 336.6 GB/s bandwidth. Despite having less memory, the GTX 780 Ti enjoys 77.7% more memory bandwidth, which helps explain its competitive compute performance. However, AMD's HBM2 implementation allows for a much smaller physical footprint, with the card described as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) slot width, whereas the NVIDIA card is a dual-slot design measuring 267 mm in length.

Compute resource allocation differs significantly. The NVIDIA card has 2880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The AMD card has only 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer than half the shading units, the AMD card achieves respectable performance due to its GCN 5.0 architecture's efficiency. The NVIDIA card's pixel rate of 55.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 222.7 GTexel/s are both higher than AMD's 41.06 GPixel/s and 102.6 GTexel/s, reflecting its larger ROP and TMU counts. However, AMD's FP32 throughput of 3.284 TFLOPS trails NVIDIA's 5.345 TFLOPS, a 38.5% deficit that the benchmark results partially overcome through architectural improvements.

The AMD card supports FP16 compute at 6.569 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature completely absent from the NVIDIA card. This makes the Radeon Pro Vega 20 better suited for modern AI and machine learning workloads that leverage half-precision arithmetic. Both cards support DirectX 12, but AMD implements version 12_1 while NVIDIA only reaches 12 (11_1), indicating better DX12 feature support on the AMD side. Vulkan support also differs, with AMD at version 1.3 versus NVIDIA's 1.2.175.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 has an average benchmark score of 27839, which is 14.9% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti's average of 24236. The AMD card also ranks higher at the 73rd percentile versus the NVIDIA card's 70th percentile.

Q: How does the AMD card perform in Metal benchmarks?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 20 scores 30427 in geekbench_metal, which is 67.7% higher than the GTX 780 Ti's 18144. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark test, showing a dominant AMD advantage in Apple's graphics API.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the GeForce GTX 780 Ti wins two of three head-to-head tests. It scores 27326 in geekbench_opencl (2.4% higher than AMD's 26679) and 27238 in geekbench_vulkan (3% higher than AMD's 26410).

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 has a TDP of 100 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti has a TDP of 250 W. This makes the AMD card significantly more power-efficient, consuming 150 W less under load.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti offers 336.6 GB/s bandwidth using GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus. The AMD card provides 189.4 GB/s via HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, giving NVIDIA a 77.7% bandwidth advantage.

Q: When were these cards released?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti launched on November 6, 2013, with a launch MSRP of 699 USD. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 followed nearly five years later on November 13, 2018.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Kepler |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 7,080 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 561 mm² |

| Base Clock | 815 MHz | 875 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1283 MHz | 928 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 1024 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 189.4 GB/s | 336.6 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 2880 |

| TMUs | 80 | 240 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 41.06 GPixel/s | 55.68 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 102.6 GTexel/s | 222.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.284 TFLOPS | 5.345 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 6.569 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not available |

| TDP | 100 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 600 W |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.175 |

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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The geekbench_metal test delivers the most dramatic divergence between these two GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 posts a score of 30427, dwarfing the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti's 18144. This 67.7% performance gap is the largest of any comparison in the database for these cards. The result makes sense given AMD's GCN architecture has historically excelled in Metal workloads, and the Radeon Pro branding targets professional Mac environments where Metal is the primary graphics API. The NVIDIA card, despite having 2880 shading units and higher memory bandwidth, cannot compensate for its older architecture's weaker Metal driver implementation.

The geekbench_opencl results show a much closer contest. NVIDIA's GeForce GTX 780 Ti scores 27326, beating AMD's 26679 by just 2.4%. This narrow margin suggests that raw compute resources matter more in OpenCL, and the GTX 780 Ti's 5.345 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, combined with its 336.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, allows it to edge out the AMD card. The AMD card's lower FP32 throughput of 3.284 TFLOPS is partially offset by its faster boost clock of 1283 MHz versus NVIDIA's 928 MHz, but not enough to overcome the NVIDIA card's superior shading unit count.

The geekbench_vulkan test mirrors the OpenCL result, with NVIDIA again taking the win. The GTX 780 Ti scores 27238, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20 scores 26410, a 3% difference. Vulkan's low-level nature tends to reward architectures with high raw throughput, and Kepler's massive compute array appears well-suited to this API. Interestingly, the NVIDIA card's Vulkan support is version 1.2.175, while AMD supports Vulkan 1.3, yet the older driver version still achieves victory. This suggests that hardware capabilities outweigh software version numbers in this workload.

Across all three tests, the AMD card wins once with a massive margin, while the NVIDIA card wins twice with modest margins. The average benchmark scores reflect this asymmetry: AMD's 27839 average benefits heavily from its Metal score, while NVIDIA's 24236 average is dragged down by its poor Metal showing. For a balanced assessment, the data indicates the Radeon Pro Vega 20 is the stronger overall GPU in the database's scoring system, ranking 3 percentile points higher than the GTX 780 Ti. However, users working exclusively with OpenCL or Vulkan applications might prefer the NVIDIA card's consistency, while Metal users would find the AMD card overwhelmingly superior.