AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 and the NVIDIA RTX A6000 across the two benchmark tests where both cards were measured. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 scores 193937, which places it 68.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56's 61930. The delta is stark, and it reflects not just a generational difference but a fundamental shift in compute architecture. In Geekbench Vulkan, the NVIDIA card again dominates with 164462 versus 66004, a 59.9% advantage for the RTX A6000. Both deltas are negative from the AMD card's perspective, meaning the Vega 56 trails by more than half in each workload.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 does have a strong showing in its own right when measured against other GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 63693 places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs tracked. That is a respectable position, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600M at 63775 (a 0.1% difference), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63830 (0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA CMP 30HX at 63842 (0.2% ahead), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 at 64212 (0.8% ahead). These are all close calls, meaning the Vega 56 is competitive within its own performance tier, but that tier is far below the RTX A6000's league.

The NVIDIA RTX A6000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 44075, which is lower than the Vega 56's average because the A6000's benchmark list includes several Passmark tests with scores that drag down the mean. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43667 (0.9% behind the A6000), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti at 44795 (1.6% ahead), the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 at 43301 (1.8% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at 43268 (1.9% behind). The A6000 sits in a tight cluster around the 43-45k range, but its percentile rank is 84, below the Vega 56's 89. That is an interesting inversion: the older AMD card ranks higher relative to all GPUs, yet loses decisively in direct head-to-head tests. The explanation lies in the benchmark mix. The A6000's Passmark scores are low, but its Geekbench numbers are enormous, and those are the tests that matter for compute-heavy workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different eras and different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 is built on GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 10 chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 12,500 million transistors into a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The NVIDIA RTX A6000 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, resulting in a density of 45.1M per mm². The A6000 nearly doubles the transistor count and achieves a significantly higher density, which is a direct consequence of the newer process node.

Clock speeds also tell a story of progress. The Vega 56 runs at a base clock of 1138 MHz and a boost clock of 1250 MHz. The RTX A6000 starts at 1410 MHz and boosts up to 1800 MHz. That is a 22% higher base clock and a 44% higher boost clock, respectively. Memory configurations diverge even more sharply. The AMD card uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, with 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A6000 has six times the memory capacity and nearly double the bandwidth. The Vega 56's memory clock is listed as 786 MHz with 1572 Mbps effective, while the A6000's memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Compute resources are where the gap becomes overwhelming. The Vega 56 has 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RTX A6000 has 10752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. That is three times the shaders, 1.5 times the TMUs, and 1.75 times the ROPs. The A6000 also includes 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores, features that simply do not exist on the Vega 56. Pixel rate jumps from 80.00 GPixel/s on the AMD card to 201.6 GPixel/s on the NVIDIA card. Texture rate climbs from 280.0 GTexel/s to 604.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 8.960 TFLOPS on the Vega 56 versus 38.71 TFLOPS on the A6000, a 4.3x difference. The Vega 56 does offer FP16 at 17.92 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, but the A6000 matches its FP32 rate at 38.71 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning the NVIDIA card is also faster in half-precision work.

Power and physical design also differ. The Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no slot width specified. The RTX A6000 has a TDP of 300 W, is a dual-slot card, uses an 8-pin EPS connector, and recommends a 700 W power supply. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 on the AMD card versus PCIe 4.0 x16 on the NVIDIA card, a bandwidth upgrade that matters for data transfer in professional workloads. Display outputs are also distinct: the Vega 56 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the A6000 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both head-to-head benchmarks, and the margins are enormous. In OpenCL, it is 68.1% faster; in Vulkan, 59.9% faster. The A6000 also offers a vastly larger memory pool, higher clocks, more compute units, and support for ray tracing and tensor operations. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56, while ranking higher in overall percentile against all GPUs, cannot compete with the A6000 in any measured compute scenario.

Who should pick the Vega 56? Based strictly on the recorded data, this card makes sense for users who need a capable GPU that ranks in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, is end-of-life but still functional, and does not require the massive memory capacity or the ray tracing and tensor features of the A6000. The Vega 56's 8 GB of HBM2 is sufficient for many professional workloads, and its 402.4 GB/s bandwidth is respectable for its era. The fact that it is an IGP with no power connectors suggests it can be integrated into systems without external power considerations, which could be a deciding factor in compact or specialized builds.

Who should pick the RTX A6000? Anyone whose work involves the benchmark categories where it excels. The 48 GB memory capacity alone is a differentiator for large datasets, and the 768.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures that data can move quickly. The 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores open up acceleration paths that the Vega 56 cannot access. The A6000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Vega 56 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. For any workload that leverages these newer APIs, the A6000 is the only choice.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 scores 193937 versus the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56's 61930, a 68.1% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2, while the NVIDIA RTX A6000 has 48 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Does the AMD card support ray tracing?

A: No. The Vega 56 has no ray tracing cores. The RTX A6000 has 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The Vega 56 has 12,500 million transistors, while the RTX A6000 has 28,300 million transistors.

Q: Which card has higher boost clock?

A: The RTX A6000 boosts to 1800 MHz, compared to the Vega 56's 1250 MHz.

Q: What is the FP32 performance gap?

A: The RTX A6000 delivers 38.71 TFLOPS, while the Vega 56 delivers 8.960 TFLOPS, a 4.3x difference.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 wins in the category of overall percentile ranking. It sits at the 89th percentile of all GPUs in the database, which is higher than the RTX A6000's 84th percentile. That is a narrow edge, but it reflects a different benchmark profile: the Vega 56's scores are concentrated in Geekbench tests that all land above 61,000, giving it a consistent average. It also wins on power efficiency per watt in one sense: the Vega 56 draws 210 W versus 300 W for the A6000, though the A6000 delivers far more performance per watt when considering the actual compute output. The Vega 56's HBM2 memory, while smaller, offers a 2048-bit bus that was advanced for its time.

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins every direct benchmark comparison. It is 68.1% faster in OpenCL and 59.9% faster in Vulkan. It wins on memory capacity by 40 GB, on bandwidth by 365.6 GB/s, on shading units by 7168, on TMUs by 112, and on ROPs by 48. It wins on pixel rate by 121.6 GPixel/s and on texture rate by 324.8 GTexel/s. It wins on FP32 by 29.75 TFLOPS. It wins on process node efficiency with a 45.1M per mm² transistor density versus 25.3M per mm². It wins on API support with DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. It wins on memory speed with 16 Gbps effective versus 1572 Mbps effective. It wins on bus interface with PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. It wins on physical dimensions by being a standard dual-slot card with defined length and height specifications.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 | NVIDIA RTX A6000 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Samsung |

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.3M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1138 MHz | 1410 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1250 MHz | 1800 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 48 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 2048 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 768.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3584 | 10752 |

| TMUs | 224 | 336 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 84 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 336 |

| Pixel Rate | 80.00 GPixel/s | 201.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 280.0 GTexel/s | 604.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 8.960 TFLOPS | 38.71 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 17.92 TFLOPS (2:1) | 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 210 W | 300 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 700 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2017-08-13 | 2020-10-04 |