AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 are separated by nearly six years of GPU architecture, and the benchmark data reflects a generational chasm. While the Pro Vega 48 holds a respectable 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs, the RTX 5080 sits at the 87th percentile, making their overall standing comparable despite the massive performance gulf in direct comparisons. The data shows a clear narrative: the RTX 5080 dominates in raw compute and modern API workloads, while the Pro Vega 48 leverages its age and driver maturity to remain surprisingly competitive in specific legacy scenarios.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparisons available are in Geekbench compute tests, and the results are lopsided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 5080 scores 235,901 against the Pro Vega 48’s 53,757, a delta of -77.2% for the AMD card. This is not a marginal victory; it is a 4.4x advantage in raw compute throughput, reflecting the NVIDIA card’s 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus the Vega’s 7.373 TFLOPS. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: 255,450 for the RTX 5080 versus 57,653 for the Pro Vega 48, a -77.4% delta. These are the two definitive wins for NVIDIA, and they are decisive.

However, the Pro Vega 48’s average benchmark score of 60,140 tells a different story when viewed in isolation. That score places it within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090’s average of 60,347, and just 0.3% behind the Intel Arc Pro A60’s 60,326. This suggests that in the specific workloads captured by the average, the older AMD card is not obsolete—it trades blows with much newer hardware. The RTX 5080’s average score of 56,083 is actually 2.5% lower than the Pro Vega 48’s, according to the nearestRivals data, which shows the AMD card ahead of the RTX 5080 by 2.5% in that aggregate metric. This is a paradox: the RTX 5080 crushes the Vega in every direct head-to-head, yet the average score favors the older card, likely due to the inclusion of legacy DirectX tests where the Vega’s mature drivers excel.

Looking at the RTX 5080’s individual Passmark results, the DirectX 9 score of 389 and DirectX 10 score of 208 are notably low, while the Pro Vega 48’s absence from those tests in the head-to-head suggests its performance is not directly comparable. The NVIDIA card’s Passmark G3D score of 36,565 and GPU compute score of 21,789 are its strongest showings, but they are not part of the direct comparison. The takeaway is simple: for modern compute APIs, the RTX 5080 is in a different league; for legacy rasterization, the Pro Vega 48 holds its own.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, starting with the manufacturing process. The Pro Vega 48 uses a 14 nm node at GlobalFoundries, while the RTX 5080 is built on a 5 nm node at TSMC. This translates to a transistor density of 25.3 million per square millimeter for the AMD chip versus 120.6 million for the NVIDIA chip—a 4.8x difference in density. The RTX 5080 packs 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die, while the Pro Vega 48 has 12,500 million on a larger 495 mm² die. This is a fundamental efficiency advantage for NVIDIA, allowing more compute units in a smaller physical footprint.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The Pro Vega 48 features 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the RTX 5080 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. More critically, the RTX 5080 introduces dedicated hardware that the Vega lacks entirely: 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores. This is a categorical difference—the Vega has no ray tracing or tensor acceleration, making it a pure rasterization and compute card. The NVIDIA card’s FP16 performance is 56.28 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, matching its FP32, while the Vega’s FP16 is 14.75 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it trades precision for speed.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The Pro Vega 48 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5080 uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, but achieves 960.0 GB/s—more than double the bandwidth despite a narrower interface. The Vega’s memory clock is 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective), while the NVIDIA card runs at 1875 MHz (30 Gbps effective). This bandwidth advantage is critical for modern workloads like AI inference and high-resolution textures. The RTX 5080 also supports PCIe 5.0 x16 versus the Vega’s PCIe 3.0 x16, doubling the potential data transfer rate to the host system.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5080 wins every modern compute scenario. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are over 4x higher than the Vega’s, making it the obvious choice for GPU-accelerated rendering, machine learning inference, and any workload that leverages Vulkan’s modern features. The presence of RT cores and tensor cores means it can handle ray-traced lighting and DLSS-style upscaling, which the Vega cannot do at all. For gaming at high resolutions with ray tracing enabled, the data suggests the RTX 5080 is the only viable option of the two.

The Pro Vega 48, despite its age, wins in the aggregate average score category. Its 60,140 average beats the RTX 5080’s 56,083 by 2.5%, and it matches the RTX 4090 within 0.3%. This indicates that in legacy DirectX 9 and 10 workloads, or in OpenCL scenarios that are not heavily parallelized, the Vega’s mature driver stack and high memory bandwidth (for its time) keep it competitive. It also has a lower transistor count and simpler architecture, which may translate to better compatibility with older software. For users running legacy CAD applications or older game engines, the Vega’s data suggests it remains a capable option.

The RTX 5080’s nearestRivals list is telling: it sits within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon 8060S and 0.7% of the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, indicating it is not an outlier in its class but rather a mid-pack performer. The Vega’s rivals include the RTX 4090, which it matches within 0.3%, suggesting that in the specific benchmarks captured, the Vega punches above its weight. This is a case where the older card wins on compatibility and driver maturity, while the newer card wins on raw compute.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has an average benchmark score of 60,140, which is 2.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080’s average of 56,083, according to the nearestRivals data.

Q: How big is the performance gap in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 5080 scores 235,901 versus the Vega’s 53,757, a delta of -77.2% for the AMD card. This means the NVIDIA GPU is roughly 4.4 times faster in this specific test.

Q: Does the Pro Vega 48 support ray tracing?

A: No. The Vega 10 chip has no RT cores listed in the spec pack, while the RTX 5080 has 84 RT cores. The AMD card relies on traditional rasterization and compute only.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 5080 has 960.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, while the Pro Vega 48 has 402.4 GB/s from 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The NVIDIA card has 2.4x more bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX 5080 has 120.6 million transistors per square millimeter, compared to the Vega’s 25.3 million. This is a 4.8x density advantage for the NVIDIA chip.

Q: Is the Pro Vega 48 still in production?

A: No. The production status is listed as "End-of-life" with a release date of March 18, 2019. The RTX 5080 is listed as "Active" with a release date of January 29, 2025.

Specification Differences

The most glaring specification difference is the process node: 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) for the AMD versus 5 nm (TSMC) for NVIDIA. This leads to a transistor count of 12,500 million on a 495 mm² die for the Vega, versus 45,600 million on a 378 mm² die for the RTX 5080. The shading units differ by 3.5x (3,072 vs 10,752), and the RTX 5080 adds 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, which the Vega does not have. Memory size doubles from 8 GB HBM2 to 16 GB GDDR7, and bandwidth increases from 402.4 GB/s to 960.0 GB/s. The bus width narrows from 2048-bit to 256-bit, but the newer memory more than compensates.

Clock speeds are another divider: the Vega has no listed base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective), while the RTX 5080 has a base clock of 2295 MHz and boost of 2617 MHz, with memory at 1875 MHz (30 Gbps effective). The FP32 performance is 7.373 TFLOPS for the Vega versus 56.28 TFLOPS for the RTX 5080, a 7.6x difference. The RTX 5080’s FP16 matches its FP32 at 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1), while the Vega’s FP16 is 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1). Power consumption is listed only for the RTX 5080 at 360 W TDP with a 750 W suggested PSU and a single 16-pin connector; the Vega is an IGP with no power connectors and no TDP listed. The RTX 5080 is dual-slot with dimensions of 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm, while the Vega is listed as IGP with no dimensions. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD. Display outputs differ: the Vega is "Portable Device Dependent," while the RTX 5080 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The API support is also distinct: DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.3 for the Vega, versus DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 for the RTX 5080.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 is the superior GPU for any modern workload. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are over 4x higher, its FP32 throughput is 7.6x greater, and it has dedicated RT and tensor cores that the AMD card lacks entirely. The 5080’s 16 GB of GDDR7 memory at 960 GB/s makes it suitable for high-resolution gaming, AI inference, and content creation, while its PCIe 5.0 interface ensures it won’t bottleneck modern CPUs. The 5080 is also an active product with a launch MSRP of 999 USD, indicating ongoing support.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, however, is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 60,140 exceeds the RTX 5080’s 56,083 by 2.5%, and it matches the RTX 4090 within 0.3%. This suggests that for legacy applications—older DirectX versions, OpenCL workloads that don’t scale with massive parallelism—the Vega’s mature drivers and high memory bandwidth (for its era) still deliver. Its 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus is a unique configuration that some specialized compute tasks may favor. But with a production status of "End-of-life," no ray tracing support, and a 14 nm process that limits efficiency, it is a niche product.

For a builder choosing today, the RTX 5080 is the logical pick for gaming, rendering, or any forward-looking compute use case. The Pro Vega 48 is only sensible if you have a legacy software stack that specifically requires GCN 5.0 architecture or if you need an integrated GPU for a portable device where the 5080’s dual-slot, 304 mm length, and 360 W TDP are physically impossible. The benchmark data shows the 5080 is the clear winner in every direct comparison; the Vega’s only "win" is an aggregate average that reflects historical compatibility, not modern performance. Choose the RTX 5080 unless your workflow is firmly rooted in the past.