AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data places these two workstation GPUs at opposite ends of the performance spectrum. In the two overlapping benchmark tests, the NVIDIA RTX A4500 dominates decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A4500 scores 141,837 against 53,757 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48, a delta of 163.8%. That is more than two and a half times the raw compute throughput in a general-purpose workload. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows slightly but remains enormous: 129,980 versus 57,653, a 125.5% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

These are not close contests. The RTX A4500 also holds a third benchmark, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, with a score of 3,196, while the AMD card has no corresponding entry in that test. Meanwhile, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 posts a Geekbench Metal score of 69,010, a test the NVIDIA card does not appear in. That Metal result is worth noting because it reflects the AMD card's intended environment, Apple Mac systems, where Metal is the native API. Still, when both cards are measured on the same cross-platform workloads, the NVIDIA product leads by a wide margin.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head picture. The RTX A4500 averages 91,671 across its tested workloads, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 averages 60,140, sitting in the 88th percentile. That 31,531-point gap in average score translates to roughly a 52% overall advantage for the NVIDIA card, though the raw delta percentages on individual tests range from 125.5% to 163.8%, showing that the gap is largest in compute-heavy OpenCL and smaller, though still dominant, in Vulkan.

Looking at nearest rivals adds context. The RTX A4500's closest competitor in the database is the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile, which averages 91,134, just 0.6% lower. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 averages 92,466, which is 0.9% above the desktop A4500. These are near-identical scores, meaning the A4500 sits in a tightly clustered performance tier. Meanwhile, the Radeon Pro Vega 48's nearest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A60 at 60,326, only 0.3% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at 60,347, also 0.3% higher. The AMD card is bracketed by very different hardware, but the takeaway is clear: the Vega 48 competes in a much lower performance class.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the choice is straightforward for most workloads. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 wins every shared benchmark by a wide margin, holds a higher average score, and ranks higher in the overall GPU percentile distribution. Anyone selecting between these two for general compute, rendering, or Vulkan-based tasks should pick the RTX A4500 without hesitation. Its 163.8% OpenCL lead and 125.5% Vulkan lead are not marginal differences; they represent fundamentally different tiers of processing capability.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has one clear niche in the recorded data: Apple Mac environments where Metal is the primary graphics API. Its 69,010 Metal score is the only benchmark where it posts a competitive number, and that test is absent from the NVIDIA card's record. If the target platform is a Mac with an integrated GPU socket, the Vega 48 is the only option listed here, as the RTX A4500 is a dual-slot PCIe card with four DisplayPort outputs, not an integrated processor. But outside that specific ecosystem, the data does not support choosing the AMD card.

The percentile rankings also matter. The RTX A4500 sits at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Vega 48 sits at the 88th. That five-point gap might sound small, but given the density of high-end cards in the upper percentiles, it represents a substantial performance chasm. The average scores confirm this: 91,671 versus 60,140 is a 52% gap in aggregate performance. For professional workloads where render times and simulation throughput matter, that difference translates to hours saved per day.

One caveat emerges from the specs: the RTX A4500 carries a 200 W TDP with a suggested 550 W power supply and one 8-pin connector, while the Vega 48 is integrated with no power connectors and no listed TDP. For a portable or pre-built Mac system, the Vega 48's power profile is inherently simpler. But for a workstation where performance is the priority, the RTX A4500's power requirements are a reasonable trade for the performance on offer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 averages 91,671 across its tested workloads, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 averages 60,140. That is a 31,531-point difference in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A4500 scores 141,837 versus 53,757 for the Vega 48, a 163.8% advantage. This is the largest delta recorded in the shared benchmarks.

Q: Does the AMD card win any benchmark?

A: In the head-to-head comparisons, the AMD card wins zero tests. However, it does have a Geekbench Metal score of 69,010, which is a benchmark the RTX A4500 does not have a recorded result for, so no direct comparison exists in that API.

Q: How do these cards rank against all GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX A4500 is in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro Vega 48 is in the 88th percentile. The average scores of 91,671 and 60,140 respectively place them in different performance tiers.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each card?

A: The RTX A4500's nearest rival is the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile at 91,134, just 0.6% lower, and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 at 92,466, which is 0.9% higher. The Vega 48's nearest rival is the Intel Arc Pro A60 at 60,326, 0.3% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at 60,347, also 0.3% higher.

Q: Is the Vega 48 suitable for Vulkan workloads?

A: The data shows it scores 57,653 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 125.5% lower than the RTX A4500's 129,980. It is functional, but it trails the NVIDIA card by a wide margin in this API.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge sharply across nearly every specification field. The RTX A4500 uses 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus with 640.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega 48 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has more memory and higher bandwidth, though the AMD card's HBM2 interface is wider.

Compute resources also differ dramatically. The RTX A4500 has 7,168 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, compared to 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs for the Vega 48. The NVIDIA card also has 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores, features the AMD card lacks entirely. Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: the RTX A4500 hits 158.4 GPixel/s and 369.6 GTexel/s, while the Vega 48 manages 76.80 GPixel/s and 230.4 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds are only partially listed for the AMD card, with no base or boost figures recorded, but the memory clock is 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the RTX A4500. The NVIDIA card's FP32 throughput is 23.65 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is also 23.65 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The Vega 48 delivers 7.373 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.75 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The RTX A4500 is roughly 3.2 times faster in FP32.

Form factor and connectivity also differ. The RTX A4500 is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long and 112 mm high, with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, one 8-pin power connector, and a 200 W TDP with a suggested 550 W power supply. The Vega 48 is an integrated processor (IGP) with no power connectors, no listed TDP, no dimensions, and display outputs described as portable device dependent. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A4500 is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. The Vega 48 uses AMD's GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 10 chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, for a density of 25.3 million per square millimeter.

The transistor counts and process nodes tell a story of different design philosophies. The Ampere chip packs more than twice the transistors into a larger die with a smaller process node, enabling the higher shading unit count and the dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores. The GCN 5.0 design is older, with fewer transistors and a less dense layout, which explains its lower compute throughput despite a comparable die size.

API support also differs. The RTX A4500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vega 48 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version. The Vega 48's FP16 performance being double its FP32 (14.75 TFLOPS versus 7.373 TFLOPS) reflects a 2:1 ratio design, while the RTX A4500's 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio suggests a different compute balance.

Release timing differs as well: the RTX A4500 launched in November 2021, while the Vega 48 launched in March 2019. Both are marked end-of-life in the database. The NVIDIA card's generation is listed as Workstation Ampere (Ax000), while the AMD card belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A4500 wins every directly comparable benchmark in the database. It leads by 163.8% in Geekbench OpenCL and 125.5% in Geekbench Vulkan, and it holds an additional 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,196 that the Vega 48 does not have an entry for. Its average benchmark score of 91,671 places it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are within a single percentage point, indicating it sits at the top of its performance tier.

The Vega 48's only recorded win is a Geekbench Metal score of 69,010, a test where the RTX A4500 has no result. In the context of Apple Mac systems, where Metal is the native graphics API, that score represents a viable path for GPU compute. The card's integrated form factor, with no power connectors and portable device dependent displays, makes it suitable for systems where a discrete card cannot be installed.

For use cases, the RTX A4500 is the clear choice for OpenCL-heavy workloads such as scientific computing, rendering, and machine learning inference, given its tensor cores and ray tracing hardware. Its 20 GB GDDR6 memory and 640.0 GB/s bandwidth support large datasets, and its 56 ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores provide features the AMD card cannot match. The Vega 48, with its 8 GB HBM2 and 402.4 GB/s bandwidth, is more limited in memory capacity but benefits from a 2048-bit bus that could help in bandwidth-sensitive tasks, though the raw numbers still favor the NVIDIA card.

The data also shows the Vega 48's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at a 0.3% higher average score, which is an unusual pairing but indicates the AMD card competes with consumer flagship GPUs from a different era. Meanwhile, the RTX A4500's rivals are all professional or workstation-class cards, reinforcing its positioning in the higher tier.

In summary, the RTX A4500 wins on raw performance, feature set, and API compatibility. The Vega 48 wins only in the narrow context of Metal-based Mac integration, where its integrated design and native API support give it a purpose. For any workload where both cards can run the same benchmark, the NVIDIA part is the definitive choice.