AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 occupy opposite ends of the workstation GPU spectrum, yet both land within 2% of each other in average benchmark score. The Quadro RTX 8000’s average sits at 28421, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20’s is 27839, a gap of roughly 2.1% favoring NVIDIA. However, the head-to-head data reveals a dramatic split in raw compute performance, with the Quadro delivering 281.9% higher OpenCL scores and 364.4% higher Vulkan scores. This is a comparison of a 48 GB professional monster against a 4 GB mobile-class part, and the numbers reflect that chasm clearly.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 leads with an average benchmark score of 28421, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20’s 27839. The delta is small—about 1.1% when measured against the AMD card’s score—but the Quadro still holds the edge in aggregate.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 scores 101883 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 281.9% higher than the Radeon Pro Vega 20’s 26679. This is the single largest win for NVIDIA in the head-to-head data.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro RTX 8000 achieves 122637, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20 scores 26410. That translates to a 364.4% advantage for NVIDIA, making Vulkan the most lopsided test between the two.

Q: Does the AMD card have any benchmark where it wins?

A: No. In the provided head-to-head benchmarks, the Radeon Pro Vega 20 records zero wins. The Quadro RTX 8000 wins both tested workloads, with winsA equal to 2 and winsB equal to 0.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 packs 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro Vega 20 has 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, providing 189.4 GB/s. That’s a 12x capacity difference and roughly 3.5x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The Quadro RTX 8000 was succeeded by Workstation Ampere, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20 has no listed successor in the data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs stem from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Quadro RTX 8000 uses NVIDIA’s Turing architecture on a 12 nm TSMC process, built around the TU102 chip with 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die. The Radeon Pro Vega 20 uses AMD’s GCN 5.0 architecture on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, with the Vega 12 chip; transistor count and die size are not listed for AMD.

The compute resources diverge sharply. NVIDIA’s TU102 contains 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 72 dedicated RT cores and 576 tensor cores. AMD’s Vega 12 has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores listed. This means the Quadro has 3.6x the shading units and 3x the ROPs, a structural advantage that shows up in every raw throughput metric.

Clock speeds and process nodes differ as well. The Quadro RTX 8000 runs at a base of 1395 MHz and boosts to 1770 MHz, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20 is much slower at 815 MHz base and 1283 MHz boost. Despite the older 14 nm node, AMD’s power envelope is far lower at 100 W TDP versus NVIDIA’s 260 W, but that comes with a corresponding drop in peak performance. The Quadro’s pixel rate is 169.9 GPixel/s and texture rate is 509.8 GTexel/s, versus 41.06 GPixel/s and 102.6 GTexel/s for the AMD part—both rates are over 4x higher on NVIDIA.

Memory architecture also reflects different target markets. The Quadro uses GDDR6 with a 384-bit bus, while the Radeon uses HBM2 with a 1024-bit bus. AMD’s wider bus helps offset its slower 740 MHz memory clock (1480 Mbps effective) but cannot overcome the capacity and bandwidth gulf. API support is another differentiator: the Quadro supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon peaks at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two shared tests, and both belong to NVIDIA. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro RTX 8000 posts 101883 against the Radeon Pro Vega 20’s 26679, a delta of 281.9%. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational and architectural blowout. The Quadro’s 16.31 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth simply overwhelm the AMD card’s 3.284 TFLOPS and 189.4 GB/s.

Geekbench Vulkan is even more lopsided. NVIDIA scores 122637 versus AMD’s 26410, a 364.4% advantage. The Vulkan gap is larger than OpenCL, suggesting that the Quadro’s newer architecture (Turing vs GCN 5.0) and higher boost clock of 1770 MHz scale better with modern APIs. The Radeon’s 1283 MHz boost and lack of dedicated RT/tensor cores cannot compensate in compute-heavy Vulkan workloads.

Notably, the Radeon Pro Vega 20 has a unique Geekbench Metal score of 30427 that has no counterpart on the Quadro side. While this indicates the AMD card is viable for Apple ecosystem workloads, it does not factor into the head-to-head comparison. The Quadro’s nearest rivals in average score include the AMD Radeon R9 M295X at 28580 (0.6% lower), the AMD FirePro S7150 at 28117 (1.1% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 28020 (1.4% lower). The Radeon Pro Vega 20’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 7800M at 27883 (0.2% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X at 27973 (0.5% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 at 27565 (1% higher).

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 wins both head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 281.9% and 364.4%, respectively. It holds a higher average benchmark score (28421 vs 27839), a higher percentile ranking (74th vs 73rd), and offers 48 GB of memory versus 4 GB. For any compute-heavy, memory-intensive, or ray-tracing workload, the Quadro is the superior part by every measured metric.

The Radeon Pro Vega 20 does have one redeeming quality: its 100 W TDP and IGP slot width make it suitable for portable or power-constrained systems. But its 3.284 TFLOPS FP32 and 189.4 GB/s bandwidth are dwarfed by the Quadro’s 16.31 TFLOPS and 672.0 GB/s. With zero wins in the head-to-head and a lower average score, the AMD card cannot be recommended for tasks where the Quadro’s capabilities are required. The Quadro RTX 8000 is the clear choice for professionals needing maximum compute, while the Radeon Pro Vega 20 is only viable for low-power, basic workstation duties where NVIDIA’s 260 W TDP is prohibitive.

Specification Differences

• Chip: NVIDIA TU102 vs AMD Vega 12
• Architecture: Turing vs GCN 5.0
• Process Node: 12 nm (TSMC) vs 14 nm (GlobalFoundries)
• Transistors: 18,600 million vs not listed
• Die Size: 754 mm² vs not listed
• Base Clock: 1395 MHz vs 815 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1770 MHz vs 1283 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) vs 740 MHz (1480 Mbps effective)
• Memory Size: 48 GB vs 4 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR6 vs HBM2
• Memory Bus Width: 384 bit vs 1024 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 672.0 GB/s vs 189.4 GB/s
• Shading Units: 4608 vs 1280
• TMUs: 288 vs 80
• ROPs: 96 vs 32
• RT Cores: 72 vs not listed
• Tensor Cores: 576 vs not listed
• Pixel Rate: 169.9 GPixel/s vs 41.06 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 509.8 GTexel/s vs 102.6 GTexel/s
• FP32: 16.31 TFLOPS vs 3.284 TFLOPS
• FP16: 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 6.569 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 260 W vs 100 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs IGP
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs not listed
• Suggested PSU: 600 W vs not listed
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3
• Dimensions: 267 mm (10.5 inches) length, 111 mm (4.4 inches) height vs not listed
• Launch MSRP: 9,999 USD (stated once per data)

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 wins in every shared benchmark category. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 101883, a 281.9% improvement over AMD. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 122637, a 364.4% improvement. Its 48 GB frame buffer and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the obvious pick for large dataset rendering, AI inference (576 tensor cores), and real-time ray tracing (72 RT cores). The 260 W TDP and dual-slot cooler are acceptable tradeoffs for a desktop workstation with a 600 W PSU recommendation.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 has no benchmark wins, but its 100 W TDP and IGP form factor point to a specific niche: slim laptops or all-in-one systems where the Quadro’s 267 mm length and power draw are impossible. Its 4 GB HBM2 memory with 189.4 GB/s bandwidth is enough for light CAD or 2D work, and its Geekbench Metal score of 30427 suggests macOS compatibility that NVIDIA cannot match. However, with 3.284 TFLOPS FP32 and no RT/tensor cores, it is not a compute contender. The data shows the Radeon Pro Vega 20 is for portability, not performance—while the Quadro RTX 8000 is for professionals who need maximum throughput and will pay the power and size cost to get it.