AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs NVIDIA Quadro GP100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single direct comparison between the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, and it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro GP100 scores 87,445 against the Radeon Pro Vega 56’s 61,930. That is a 41.2% advantage for the NVIDIA card. To put that gap in perspective, the Quadro GP100 sits at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 lands at the 89th percentile. Both are high performers, but the difference between them is substantial in raw compute throughput.

The Quadro GP100’s score is not just a win; it is a statement. A 41.2% delta means the AMD card would need a major architectural overhaul to close that gap. The Radeon Pro Vega 56 does have additional benchmark entries in the database, including a Geekbench Metal score of 63,145 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 66,004, but the only cross-platform comparison available is OpenCL, and there the NVIDIA part dominates.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card helps contextualize the numbers further. The Quadro GP100’s closest competitor in the database is the AMD Radeon PRO W7600, which scores 87,108, a mere 0.4% behind. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile and RTX A4500 are ahead by 4% and 4.6% respectively. The Radeon Pro Vega 56, by contrast, sits in a tighter cluster: the AMD Radeon RX 7600M is 0.1% behind, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP is 0.2% behind, and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX is 0.2% behind. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is 0.8% ahead. This suggests the Radeon Pro Vega 56 is competitive within its immediate peer group but that peer group is a full tier below the Quadro GP100.

The win count in the head-to-head comparison is 1-0 in favor of the Quadro GP100. There are no benchmark categories where the Radeon Pro Vega 56 pulls ahead. That is not to say the AMD card is weak; its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 63,693, which is respectable. But the Quadro GP100’s single OpenCL result of 87,445 stands as the only direct measurement, and it is overwhelmingly in NVIDIA’s favor.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. If the workload is OpenCL compute, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is the correct choice. It delivers 41.2% higher performance in the recorded benchmark, and it does so with a higher ceiling relative to the broader GPU landscape. The Quadro GP100 sits at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 sits at the 89th. That four-point percentile gap translates into a massive raw score difference.

For users who specifically need Metal or Vulkan performance, the Radeon Pro Vega 56 has recorded scores in those APIs, but the database does not provide equivalent Quadro GP100 results for those tests, so a direct comparison is not possible. The only apples-to-apples measurement is OpenCL, and there the verdict is clear.

Professional users should also consider the memory configuration. The Quadro GP100 carries 16 GB of HBM2 across a 4096-bit bus, yielding 732.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, producing 402.4 GB/s. For large datasets, the Quadro GP100’s capacity and bandwidth are decisive advantages. The Radeon Pro Vega 56’s integrated form factor (IGP, no power connectors) makes it suitable for specific Mac-oriented systems, but that does not compensate for the compute deficit.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 is built on the Pascal architecture, specifically the GP100 chip, manufactured by TSMC on a 16 nm process. It packs 15,300 million transistors into a 610 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.1 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip under the GCN 5.0 architecture, produced by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. It contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, for a density of 25.3 million per mm². Notably, the AMD chip has a marginally higher transistor density despite the larger process node, but the NVIDIA chip has 2,800 million more transistors overall.

Clock speeds differ meaningfully. The Quadro GP100 runs at 1304 MHz base and 1443 MHz boost, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 runs at 1138 MHz base and 1250 MHz boost. The NVIDIA card also has a higher memory clock at 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective) versus 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) on the AMD card. The higher memory clock on the AMD part does not compensate for its narrower bus.

Shading unit counts are identical: both cards have 3584 shading units and 224 texture mapping units. The ROP count differs, with the Quadro GP100 at 96 ROPs and the Radeon Pro Vega 56 at 64. This contributes to the pixel rate gap: 138.5 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 80.00 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rates also favor NVIDIA: 323.2 GTexel/s versus 280.0 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 10.34 TFLOPS for the Quadro GP100 and 8.960 TFLOPS for the Radeon Pro Vega 56. FP16 rates scale proportionally at a 2:1 ratio: 20.69 TFLOPS versus 17.92 TFLOPS.

Power requirements are also distinct. The Quadro GP100 has a TDP of 235 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested 550 W power supply. The Radeon Pro Vega 56 has a lower TDP of 210 W and requires no power connectors, as it is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) for Mac systems. This makes the AMD card far easier to install in terms of power delivery, but it also reflects its lower peak performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the only direct benchmark comparison?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 87,445 versus the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56’s 61,930, a 41.2% advantage.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro Vega 56 have any benchmark where it beats the Quadro GP100?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the Radeon Pro Vega 56 in the head-to-head comparison. It has separate Metal and Vulkan scores, but no equivalent Quadro GP100 results exist for those tests.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The Quadro GP100 has 16 GB of HBM2 memory, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2. The Quadro GP100 also has a 4096-bit bus with 732.2 GB/s bandwidth, versus the Radeon’s 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s.

Q: Are the shading unit counts the same?

A: Yes, both cards have 3584 shading units and 224 texture mapping units. The ROP counts differ: 96 for the Quadro GP100 and 64 for the Radeon Pro Vega 56.

Q: What process nodes do the two cards use?

A: The Quadro GP100 is manufactured by TSMC on a 16 nm process, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 is manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process.

Q: Which card has a lower power draw?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W and requires no power connectors, while the Quadro GP100 has a TDP of 235 W and requires one 8-pin connector with a 550 W suggested power supply.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 wins in every measurable category that the database records. It has a higher OpenCL score, more memory capacity, wider memory bus, more bandwidth, higher pixel rate, higher texture rate, higher FP32 and FP16 throughput, and more ROPs. Its only disadvantage is a slightly higher TDP and the need for a power connector. For compute-heavy workloads, large dataset processing, or any task where OpenCL performance is the bottleneck, the Quadro GP100 is the superior part.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 does have its own strengths, though they are not captured in the head-to-head benchmark. It has recorded Metal and Vulkan scores of 63,145 and 66,004 respectively, which indicate it can handle those APIs competently. Its IGP form factor and lack of power connectors make it an easy fit for systems with limited power delivery or physical space constraints. It also has a slightly lower TDP, which could matter in thermally constrained environments.

However, from a pure performance standpoint, the Radeon Pro Vega 56’s nearest rivals in the database are cards like the AMD Radeon RX 7600M and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP, all within 0.2% of its average score. The Quadro GP100’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 and NVIDIA CMP 40HX, which are within 2.1% but still far above the Radeon Pro Vega 56’s tier. The Quadro GP100 is simply in a higher performance class.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification that matters for compute performance. The Quadro GP100 uses the Pascal architecture with a GP100 chip, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses GCN 5.0 with a Vega 10 chip. Process nodes differ: 16 nm TSMC versus 14 nm GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 15,300 million versus 12,500 million, with die sizes of 610 mm² versus 495 mm².

Clock speeds favor NVIDIA: 1304 MHz base and 1443 MHz boost versus 1138 MHz base and 1250 MHz boost. Memory configurations are starkly different: 16 GB HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus with 732.2 GB/s bandwidth versus 8 GB HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro GP100 has 96 ROPs, the Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 64. Pixel rates are 138.5 GPixel/s versus 80.00 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 323.2 GTexel/s versus 280.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 10.34 TFLOPS versus 8.960 TFLOPS. FP16 is 20.69 TFLOPS versus 17.92 TFLOPS.

Power specifications also diverge. The Quadro GP100 is a dual-slot card with a 235 W TDP and a single 8-pin connector, requiring a 550 W power supply. The Radeon Pro Vega 56 is an IGP with a 210 W TDP and no power connectors. Physical dimensions are available only for the Quadro GP100: 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height. Display outputs differ as well: the Quadro GP100 offers 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Release dates are separated by roughly eleven months: the Quadro GP100 launched in September 2016, the Radeon Pro Vega 56 in August 2017. Both are end-of-life products. The Quadro GP100’s predecessor is Quadro Maxwell and its successor is Quadro Volta; the Radeon Pro Vega 56 has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Quadro GP100’s average benchmark score is 87,445, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56’s is 63,693, a difference that mirrors the head-to-head OpenCL result.