AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between these two workstation cards. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 124,812 against the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56's 61,930. That is a 101.5% advantage, meaning the NVIDIA card delivers more than double the compute throughput in this workload. The Vulkan result is similarly one-sided, with the RTX 4000 SFF scoring 109,364 versus 66,004 for the Vega 56, a 65.7% lead. Across the two shared benchmark tests, the NVIDIA card wins both, giving it a clean 2-0 record in head-to-head comparisons.

The magnitude of the OpenCL delta is worth emphasizing. A 101.5% difference is not incremental; it represents a full generational leap in raw compute capability. The RTX 4000 SFF's FP32 throughput is listed at 19.17 TFLOPS, while the Vega 56 manages 8.960 TFLOPS. Those figures align with the benchmark outcomes. Meanwhile, the Vulkan gap, while smaller, still shows the NVIDIA architecture handling modern graphics APIs with significantly more efficiency. The Vega 56 does have a higher FP16 rate at 17.92 TFLOPS compared to the RTX 4000 SFF's 19.17 TFLOPS, but that is a 2:1 ratio on the AMD side versus a 1:1 ratio on NVIDIA, and the benchmark results show the NVIDIA card still wins the cross-platform tests.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the NVIDIA card's standing. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 117,088. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GB10, scores 117,393, a negligible 0.3% difference. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 is 1.6% behind, and the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB trails by 2.4%. The RTX A5500 Mobile is 2.8% behind. This places the RTX 4000 SFF in a tight cluster of high-end workstation parts, all within a few points of each other.

The Vega 56, by contrast, sits at the 89th percentile, which is respectable but clearly a tier below. Its average benchmark score is 63,693. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 7600M, scores 63,775, a 0.1% difference. The RX 9060 XT LP is 0.2% behind, the NVIDIA CMP 30HX is 0.2% behind, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is 0.8% ahead. This grouping shows the Vega 56 competing with midrange mobile and low-profile desktop parts, not with the current generation of high-end workstation accelerators.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in every measured category. In OpenCL, it is more than twice as fast, which makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads such as rendering, simulation, or any task that leverages OpenCL acceleration. In Vulkan, the 65.7% lead indicates a strong advantage in graphics-oriented applications that use this API, including many modern game engines and real-time visualization tools.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 does not win any of the recorded benchmark tests. However, the data does show areas where it is not as far behind. Its Vulkan score of 66,004 is closer to the NVIDIA card's 109,364 than its OpenCL score is, suggesting that the Vega 56's GCN 5.0 architecture handles Vulkan relatively better than it handles OpenCL. Still, "relatively better" does not translate into a win; it simply narrows the gap.

For users who prioritize OpenCL compute, the RTX 4000 SFF is the only rational choice from this comparison. For Vulkan-based workloads, the NVIDIA card is still ahead, but the delta is smaller, so a user already invested in AMD's ecosystem might find the Vega 56 less painful for those tasks. That said, the benchmark data offers no scenario where the Vega 56 comes out on top. The RTX 4000 SFF also has the advantage in memory capacity, with 20 GB versus 8 GB, and in bandwidth efficiency, though the Vega 56's raw bandwidth is higher at 402.4 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s. The larger pool of memory on the NVIDIA card matters more for large datasets, and the lower power draw makes it viable in compact systems.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 117,088, versus 63,693 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56. That is a substantial difference, roughly 84% higher on average.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4000 SFF in OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF scores 124,812 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Vega 56 scores 61,930. This gives the NVIDIA card a 101.5% advantage, meaning it is more than twice as fast in that specific test.

Q: Does the Vega 56 win in any benchmark?

A: No. Across the two shared benchmark tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the Vega 56 loses both. The measured wins are 2 for the NVIDIA card and 0 for the AMD card.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, yielding 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, yielding 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 56 has higher raw bandwidth, but the RTX 4000 SFF has 2.5 times the capacity.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF is within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GB10, 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, and 2.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB. The Vega 56 is within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600M, 0.2% ahead of the RX 9060 XT LP, and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF has a TDP of 70 W and needs no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W and also uses no power connectors, but no suggested PSU is listed in the database.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The RTX 4000 SFF packs 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². The Vega 56 has 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, for a density of 25.3 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip is far denser and newer.

Clock speeds are in stark contrast. The RTX 4000 SFF runs a base clock of 720 MHz and boosts to 1560 MHz. The Vega 56 runs a base clock of 1138 MHz and boosts to 1250 MHz. Despite the lower base clock, the NVIDIA card's higher boost clock and architectural efficiency deliver far better results. Memory clocks also differ: the RTX 4000 SFF runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, while the Vega 56 runs at 786 MHz with 1572 Mbps effective.

The memory systems are fundamentally different. The RTX 4000 SFF uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus. The Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The Vega 56 has higher bandwidth at 402.4 GB/s versus 280.0 GB/s, but the RTX 4000 SFF has more capacity and a much smaller bus, which is an unusual trade-off.

Compute unit counts also diverge. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Vega 56 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has nearly twice the shading units, while the AMD card has more TMUs. The RTX 4000 SFF also includes 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, which the Vega 56 lacks entirely. Pixel rates are 99.84 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 80.00 GPixel/s for AMD, while texture rates are identical at 299.5 GTexel/s for both.

The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 on the RTX 4000 SFF versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on the Vega 56. Display outputs also differ, with the NVIDIA card offering 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a and the AMD card offering 1x HDMI 2.0b plus 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 4000 SFF is dual-slot and measures 168 mm in length, while the Vega 56 is listed as IGP (integrated graphics package) with no dimensions recorded. Power consumption is dramatically different: 70 W for NVIDIA versus 210 W for AMD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD104 chip. This is a 5 nm TSMC design with 35,800 million transistors. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The architecture includes dedicated RT cores for ray tracing and tensor cores for AI workloads, with 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores present. The FP32 and FP16 rates are identical at 19.17 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio for these data types.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 is built on GCN 5.0, using the Vega 10 chip. This is a 14 nm GlobalFoundries design with 12,500 million transistors. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. There are no RT cores and no tensor cores. The FP32 rate is 8.960 TFLOPS, while the FP16 rate is 17.92 TFLOPS, reflecting a 2:1 ratio. This means the Vega 56 can do twice the FP16 work per cycle, but that advantage is not reflected in the benchmark results, likely because the workloads tested are not FP16-bound.

The node difference is stark: 5 nm versus 14 nm. That alone explains much of the efficiency gap, with the RTX 4000 SFF drawing 70 W versus 210 W for the Vega 56. The NVIDIA card also has a newer memory type (GDDR6 versus HBM2) and a wider feature set. The Vega 56's HBM2 memory gives it a bandwidth advantage, but the architecture lacks the modern compute features that the Ada Lovelace design brings. The production status also differs: the RTX 4000 SFF is active, while the Vega 56 is end-of-life.

The release dates reflect this gap: the RTX 4000 SFF launched on March 20, 2023, while the Vega 56 launched on August 13, 2017. That is nearly six years of architectural evolution, and the benchmark data shows exactly what that time buys. The RTX 4000 SFF is part of the Workstation Ada generation, succeeding Workstation Ampere, while the Vega 56 is part of the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation with no recorded predecessor or successor.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the superior card in every measured benchmark. It wins OpenCL by 101.5% and Vulkan by 65.7%, and it holds a 2-0 record in head-to-head tests. Its average benchmark score of 117,088 places it at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, while the Vega 56's 63,693 sits at the 89th percentile. The NVIDIA card is also the only one of the two with active production status.

Who should pick the RTX 4000 SFF? Anyone running OpenCL-heavy workloads, Vulkan-based graphics, or compute tasks that benefit from 20 GB of memory. The 70 W power draw and dual-slot design make it suitable for compact workstations, and the lack of power connectors simplifies installation. The 250 W suggested PSU is a modest requirement. Users coming from older NVIDIA workstation parts, like the Workstation Ampere generation, will find this a direct upgrade.

Who should pick the Vega 56? The data does not support a recommendation for compute or graphics performance. However, the Vega 56 does have a higher memory bandwidth at 402.4 GB/s, which could matter for specific memory-bandwidth-bound tasks. Its 8 GB of HBM2 is also a different memory type, which might be relevant for legacy software compatibility. But given that it is end-of-life, launched in 2017, and loses both benchmarks by large margins, its only appeal is to users who specifically need the Vega 10 chip or the Radeon Pro Mac platform. For everyone else, the RTX 4000 SFF is the only choice backed by the recorded data.