AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a stark contrast between these two GPUs. In the two shared tests, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER wins decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 219,065 against the Radeon Pro Vega 48’s 53,757, a delta of -75.5% from the AMD card’s perspective. That means NVIDIA is roughly four times faster in raw compute throughput. The Vulkan result is even more lopsided: 260,075 versus 57,653, a -77.8% delta. The RTX 4080 SUPER is nearly 4.5 times faster in this API workload.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story, however. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 has an average score of 60,140 across its tested workloads, while the RTX 4080 SUPER averages 54,209. The AMD card actually holds a higher average percentile ranking at 88 versus 86 for NVIDIA. This is because the benchmark suites differ between the two products. The AMD card was tested in Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, while the NVIDIA card was tested in DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, 3DMark Steel Nomad, Passmark G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s Passmark DirectX scores are notably low (381 in DX9, 301 in DX11, 193 in DX10, 134 in DX12), which drags its average down despite massive wins in OpenCL and Vulkan.

The head-to-head data only includes the two Geekbench tests, and NVIDIA wins both. There is no shared Metal or DirectX benchmark in the head-to-head table, so the broader picture relies on the individual benchmark lists. In Geekbench Metal, the AMD card scores 69,010, which is its strongest result. The RTX 4080 SUPER has no Metal score listed, as that API is exclusive to Apple platforms. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s strongest result is its Geekbench Vulkan score of 260,075, followed by OpenCL at 219,065. Its Passmark G3D score of 34,245 is also substantial.

The percentile data places both cards in the upper tier of all GPUs, with the AMD card at 88 and the NVIDIA card at 86. Yet the head-to-head deltas are so large that the NVIDIA card is clearly in a different performance class for compute and graphics workloads common to both. The AMD card’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at a delta of -0.3% and the Intel Arc Pro A60 at -0.3%, indicating that the Radeon Pro Vega 48 sits in a peculiar performance band where its average score is nearly identical to that of the flagship RTX 4090 in this particular database. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s nearest rivals are the RTX 4080 (-0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (-1.1%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (-2.7%).

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference alone – 14 nm versus 5 nm – explains much of the efficiency and density gap, though the AMD card has no TDP listed while the NVIDIA card is rated at 320 W.

The transistor counts are dramatically different. The AMD chip has 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The NVIDIA chip has 45,900 million transistors on a much smaller 379 mm² die, yielding 121.1M per mm². That is nearly five times the transistor density on a smaller physical die. The NVIDIA chip crams 3.7 times more transistors into 23% less silicon area.

Memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The AMD card uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 736.3 GB/s. Despite having an 8x narrower bus, the NVIDIA card achieves 83% more bandwidth thanks to much faster memory clocks (1438 MHz / 23 Gbps effective versus 786 MHz / 1572 Mbps effective for AMD).

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward NVIDIA. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA card also features 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. Pixel rate is 285.6 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 816.0 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 52.22 TFLOPS versus 7.373 TFLOPS, a 7x difference. FP16 is 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA versus 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD.

The API support differs as well. NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The NVIDIA card is a triple-slot card measuring 310 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width, requiring a 1x 16-pin power connector and a 700 W suggested PSU. The AMD card is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no listed dimensions, designed for portable device dependent display outputs. The NVIDIA card has dedicated display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER is the far more capable GPU in every shared benchmark. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins exceeding 75%. Its compute resources, memory bandwidth, and feature set (RT cores, tensor cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate) are all superior. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 is an end-of-life product from 2019, built on a 14 nm process with 2016-era GCN architecture. Its only advantages in the data are its higher average benchmark score (60,140 versus 54,209) and its higher percentile rank (88 versus 86), but those figures are artifacts of the different benchmark suites applied to each card.

The RTX 4080 SUPER is also end-of-life, but it is a much newer product (released January 2024 versus March 2019). Its launch MSRP is 999 USD. The AMD card has no launch MSRP listed. The NVIDIA card’s nearest rival is its predecessor, the RTX 4080, at a -0.1% delta, meaning the SUPER variant is essentially a marginal refresh. The AMD card’s nearest rival is the RTX 4090 at -0.3%, which is a bizarre data point that suggests the benchmark database treats these cards similarly in aggregate, but the head-to-head tests tell the real story.

For anyone choosing between these two, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the obvious choice for performance. It is 4.5x faster in Vulkan and 4x faster in OpenCL. It has double the memory capacity (16 GB versus 8 GB), higher bandwidth, and modern feature support. The AMD card’s only niche is Apple ecosystem compatibility, given its Metal benchmark score of 69,010 and its IGP form factor. But the data does not show any scenario where the AMD card wins in a shared workload.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification field. The process node is 14 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The foundry is GlobalFoundries versus TSMC. Transistors are 12,500 million versus 45,900 million. Die size is 495 mm² versus 379 mm². Transistor density is 25.3M/mm² versus 121.1M/mm². The NVIDIA card has base and boost clocks listed (2295 MHz and 2550 MHz), while the AMD card has neither. Memory clock is 786 MHz / 1572 Mbps effective versus 1438 MHz / 23 Gbps effective.

Memory size is 8 GB versus 16 GB. Memory type is HBM2 versus GDDR6X. Bus width is 2048-bit versus 256-bit. Bandwidth is 402.4 GB/s versus 736.3 GB/s. Shading units are 3,072 versus 10,240. TMUs are 192 versus 320. ROPs are 64 versus 112. RT cores are absent versus 80. Tensor cores are absent versus 320. Pixel rate is 76.80 GPixel/s versus 285.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 230.4 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 7.373 TFLOPS versus 52.22 TFLOPS. FP16 is 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1).

The AMD card has no TDP listed, while the NVIDIA card is rated at 320 W. Slot width is IGP versus triple-slot. Power connectors are none versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU is absent versus 700 W. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). Vulkan is 1.3 versus 1.4. The NVIDIA card has dimensions (310 mm x 140 mm x 61 mm), while the AMD card has none. Release dates are March 2019 versus January 2024. The NVIDIA card has a predecessor (GeForce 30) and successor (GeForce 50), while the AMD card has neither.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER scores 260,075 versus 57,653 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, a delta of -77.8%. NVIDIA is approximately 4.5 times faster.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 have any benchmark where it wins?

A: In the head-to-head benchmark data, the AMD card wins zero tests. However, it has a higher average benchmark score (60,140 versus 54,209) and a higher percentile rank (88 versus 86) across its respective benchmark suite.

Q: What memory configurations do these cards use?

A: The AMD card uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus with 736.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the AMD card support ray tracing?

A: No. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has no RT cores listed. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER has 80 RT cores.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The AMD card is an IGP with no power connectors, no dimensions, and portable device dependent display outputs. The NVIDIA card is a triple-slot card measuring 310 mm x 140 mm x 61 mm, requiring a 1x 16-pin power connector and a 700 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has higher transistor density?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER has 121.1M transistors per mm² on a 379 mm² die. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has 25.3M per mm² on a 495 mm² die.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER wins in every measurable shared workload. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 219,065 versus 53,757 and its Vulkan score of 260,075 versus 57,653 are the only direct comparisons available, and both are landslides. The NVIDIA card also wins on raw specifications: more shading units (10,240 versus 3,072), higher pixel rate (285.6 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (816.0 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s), and 7x higher FP32 throughput (52.22 TFLOPS versus 7.373 TFLOPS). It has double the memory capacity and 83% more bandwidth. It supports newer APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate versus 12_1, Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.3) and has dedicated RT and tensor cores.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 wins only in the context of its own benchmark suite. Its Geekbench Metal score of 69,010 is its best result, and no NVIDIA card in this comparison has a Metal score. Its average benchmark score of 60,140 is higher than the NVIDIA card’s 54,209, and its percentile rank of 88 beats NVIDIA’s 86. These wins are artifacts of different test coverage rather than genuine performance advantages. The AMD card also wins on power delivery simplicity: it is an IGP with no power connectors, whereas the NVIDIA card requires a 16-pin connector and a 700 W PSU. For integrated or portable device deployments, the AMD card is the only viable option in this comparison, as the NVIDIA card is a bulky triple-slot discrete card.

The use-case split is therefore clear. For any desktop workstation, gaming rig, or compute workload where OpenCL or Vulkan is used, the RTX 4080 SUPER is overwhelmingly superior. For Apple-centric workflows that rely on Metal, the Radeon Pro Vega 48 has a listed score while the RTX 4080 SUPER has none. For space-constrained or power-constrained environments where a discrete GPU with external power is impractical, the AMD IGP form factor is the only choice, though its performance is a fraction of the NVIDIA card’s. The data does not support any scenario where the AMD card outperforms the NVIDIA card in a shared application.