AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile workstation GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile wins both recorded head-to-head comparisons, but the margin tells the real story. In OpenCL, a compute-heavy API used by rendering and simulation workloads, the NVIDIA part is in another class entirely. Its score of 105307 against 53757 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 represents a 95.9% advantage. That is not a small gap, it is nearly double the performance.

The Vulkan results are closer but still favor NVIDIA. The RTX A4500 Mobile posts 76960 against 57653, a 33.5% lead. Vulkan is more of a gaming-oriented API, but it also appears in DCC viewport applications. The AMD card is competitive in this metric in a way it is not in OpenCL, but it still trails by a third.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 does not win either head-to-head benchmark. However, it has one unique strength in the database: a Metal benchmark score of 69010. The NVIDIA card has no recorded Metal result, which means on Apple platforms where Metal is the primary API, the AMD part at least has a measurable presence. For macOS-specific workflows, the AMD card is the only one of these two with data to show.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the hierarchy. The RTX A4500 Mobile sits at 91134 average across its recorded tests, while the Vega 48 averages 60140. The NVIDIA card lands in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, the AMD in the 88th. Both are strong workstation parts, but the NVIDIA part is positioned roughly 50% higher in aggregate performance.

Architecture Differences

These two GPUs come from different design philosophies and different manufacturing generations. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile uses the GA104 chip built on Samsung's 8 nm process. It packs 17,400 million transistors onto a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 uses the Vega 10 chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 12,500 million transistors spread across a larger 495 mm² die. That works out to just 25.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The node advantage is significant: NVIDIA fits more transistors on a smaller chip.

The memory subsystems are also fundamentally different. The RTX A4500 Mobile uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 48 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a massive 2048-bit bus, but only reaches 402.4 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has both more capacity and higher bandwidth. The memory clock situation is unusual: the AMD part runs its HBM2 at just 786 MHz with 1572 Mbps effective, while the NVIDIA card runs GDDR6 at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Compute resources differ sharply. The RTX A4500 Mobile has 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The Vega 48 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA has nearly double the shader count, while AMD has slightly more texture units. The NVIDIA card also has dedicated hardware that AMD lacks entirely: 46 RT cores for ray tracing and 184 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The Vega 48 has neither.

The API support reflects this hardware split. The NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the AMD part is limited to DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1. Both support OpenGL 4.6. NVIDIA lists Vulkan 1.4, AMD lists Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card is the more future-proof choice for newer graphics APIs.

The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 4.0 x16 on NVIDIA versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on AMD. The older PCIe standard on the AMD card could bottleneck data transfers in some workloads, though HBM2's high bus width compensates in memory-bound scenarios.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL result is the defining data point. The RTX A4500 Mobile scores 105307, which is 95.9% higher than the Vega 48's 53757. This is the largest delta between the two cards in any test. The NVIDIA architecture's raw FP32 throughput of 17.66 TFLOPS versus 7.373 TFLOPS for the AMD card explains much of this gap. The AMD part's FP16 rate of 14.75 TFLOPS is actually higher than its FP32 rate due to the 2:1 ratio, but OpenCL workloads typically exercise FP32.

The Vulkan test shows a narrower but still decisive NVIDIA win: 76960 versus 57653, a 33.5% delta. This test likely stresses geometry and rasterization more than raw compute. The AMD card's higher TMU count (192 versus 184) helps close the gap somewhat, but the NVIDIA card's superior pixel rate of 144.0 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s keeps it ahead.

Context from the nearest rivals puts these scores in perspective. The RTX A4500 Mobile's average score of 91134 is just 0.6% below the desktop RTX A4500, meaning the mobile part essentially matches its desktop sibling in these tests. It sits 1.4% below the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 and 4.2% above the NVIDIA Quadro GP100. The Vega 48's average of 60140 is 0.3% below both the Intel Arc Pro A60 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 in this particular benchmark suite, which is surprising but reflects the database's specific workload mix. It is 2.5% above the AMD Radeon PRO V710 and 2.8% above the NVIDIA P102-100.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile is the stronger GPU for compute-heavy workstation tasks. Its OpenCL dominance alone, nearly double the AMD card's score, makes it the obvious choice for rendering, simulation, and any workload that scales with raw FP32 throughput.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 is not without merit. It has a recorded Metal benchmark score, which the NVIDIA card lacks. For anyone working in macOS environments where Metal is the standard API, the AMD card is the only one of these two with measurable support in the database. Its 69010 Metal score indicates respectable performance in that ecosystem.

The RTX A4500 Mobile also brings features the AMD card cannot match: ray tracing cores, tensor cores, newer DirectX support, and double the memory capacity at 16 GB versus 8 GB. The bandwidth advantage is substantial, 512.0 GB/s versus 402.4 GB/s, and the PCIe 4.0 interface is twice the generation of the Vega 48's PCIe 3.0.

Choose the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile if your priorities are raw compute performance, modern API support, ray tracing capability, or large memory footprints for deep learning or complex scene data. Choose the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 only if you specifically need Metal performance on Apple platforms, where NVIDIA's lack of a recorded Metal score makes the AMD part the safer bet.

For every other scenario, the benchmark data favors NVIDIA by a wide margin. The 95.9% OpenCL delta is not a subtle difference, it is a generational leap in compute power.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile scores 105307 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 95.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48's 53757.

Q: Does the AMD card win any benchmark?

A: In the recorded head-to-head tests, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 does not win either OpenCL or Vulkan. However, it has a Geekbench Metal score of 69010, a test the NVIDIA card does not have recorded.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The NVIDIA GA104 chip contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die. The AMD Vega 10 chip contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX A4500 Mobile has 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has neither RT cores nor tensor cores.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile scores 76960 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 33.5% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48's 57653.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 17,400 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 392 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 44.4M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 402.4 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective | 786 MHz, 1572 Mbps effective |

| Shading Units | 5888 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 184 | 192 |

| ROPs | 96 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 46 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 184 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 144.0 GPixel/s | 76.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 276.0 GTexel/s | 230.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 17.66 TFLOPS | 7.373 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 17.66 TFLOPS (1:1) | 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 140 W | Not specified |

| Slot Width | Not specified | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2022-03-21 | 2019-03-18 |