AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive NVIDIA victory in the two shared benchmark workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro Vega 64 scores 71,094, while the GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER reaches 219,065, a 67.5% deficit for the AMD part. The gap widens further under Geekbench Vulkan: AMD posts 74,174 against NVIDIA’s 260,075, meaning the RTX 4080 SUPER leads by 71.5% in that test. Across the head-to-head set, NVIDIA wins 2 benchmarks to AMD’s 0, with no workload where the older Vega architecture manages to close the gap.

The Vulkan result is particularly telling. AMD’s score of 74,174 is only about 4.3% higher than its OpenCL result, while NVIDIA improves from 219,065 in OpenCL to 260,075 in Vulkan, an 18.7% gain. This suggests the Ada Lovelace architecture extracts more performance from Vulkan’s API features, whereas the Vega 10 chip’s GCN 5.0 design shows less scaling between these two compute interfaces. The raw delta in Vulkan, 185,901 points, is larger than the entire OpenCL score of the AMD card, illustrating how far apart these products sit in absolute terms.

The average benchmark score also reflects the separation. The Radeon Pro Vega 64 averages 72,379 across its benchmark set, while the RTX 4080 SUPER averages 54,209, even though the NVIDIA card includes a broader range of tests, including Passmark suites where scores are on a different scale. That average discrepancy is primarily an artifact of test composition, but the shared tests show the true performance relationship.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design generations. The Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses the Vega 10 chip on GCN 5.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. Its transistor density is 25.3M per mm². The RTX 4080 SUPER uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, packing 45,900 million transistors into a smaller 379 mm² die, achieving 121.1M transistors per mm². That density difference, nearly 4.8 times higher, is a central factor in the performance gap.

Memory subsystems diverge sharply. AMD pairs its 16 GB frame buffer with HBM2 memory across a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. NVIDIA also has 16 GB, but uses GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, reaching 736.3 GB/s. The RTX 4080 SUPER nearly doubles memory bandwidth despite having one-eighth the bus width, a direct consequence of much faster memory clocks (1438 MHz, 23 Gbps effective versus 786 MHz, 1572 Mbps effective for AMD).

Compute resources favor NVIDIA by a wide margin. The Radeon Pro Vega 64 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, producing 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 345.6 GTexel/s texture rate. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, yielding 285.6 GPixel/s and 816.0 GTexel/s. In FP32, NVIDIA reaches 52.22 TFLOPS versus AMD’s 11.06 TFLOPS, a 4.7 times advantage. FP16 shows a similar split: NVIDIA matches its FP32 rate at 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1), while AMD achieves 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1), meaning the Vega part halves its throughput for FP16 workloads.

The RTX 4080 SUPER adds dedicated hardware absent from the AMD card: 80 RT cores for ray tracing and 320 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The Vega 64 has no such units. Clock speeds also differ drastically, with NVIDIA boosting to 2550 MHz versus AMD’s 1350 MHz. The RTX 4080 SUPER consumes 320 W with a 700 W recommended PSU, while the Vega 64 draws 250 W but uses no external power connectors, being an integrated GPU (IGP) with portable-device-dependent outputs. The AMD card relies on PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 64 averages 72,379 across its benchmarks, while the RTX 4080 SUPER averages 54,209. However, the head-to-head tests show NVIDIA winning decisively, so the averages are not directly comparable due to different test sets.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4080 SUPER in Vulkan?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 260,075 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 74,174 for the Radeon Pro Vega 64, a 71.5% lead for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. NVIDIA’s GDDR6X memory delivers 736.3 GB/s on a 256-bit bus, compared to AMD’s HBM2 at 402.4 GB/s on a 2048-bit bus.

Q: What process nodes do these GPUs use?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses 5 nm at TSMC.

Q: Does the RTX 4080 SUPER support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 80 RT cores. The Radeon Pro Vega 64 has no RT cores and no tensor cores.

Q: Which card has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER reaches 285.6 GPixel/s and 816.0 GTexel/s, versus 86.40 GPixel/s and 345.6 GTexel/s for the Radeon Pro Vega 64.

The Verdict

The data points to the RTX 4080 SUPER as the substantially stronger performer in shared workloads. Its 67.5% OpenCL lead and 71.5% Vulkan lead over the Radeon Pro Vega 64 are not marginal differences; they represent a generational leap in compute throughput. The NVIDIA card’s FP32 rate of 52.22 TFLOPS dwarfs AMD’s 11.06 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 736.3 GB/s nearly doubles the Vega part’s 402.4 GB/s. For any workload that scales with raw shading power, texture rate, or memory throughput, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the clear choice.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 does retain some relevance through its HBM2 memory and 2048-bit bus, which may offer advantages in specific memory-latency-sensitive tasks, but the benchmark data does not capture such a scenario. Its 91st percentile ranking among all GPUs is respectable, yet the RTX 4080 SUPER’s 86th percentile reflects a different benchmark pool, not a lower capability. The Vega card is end-of-life, released in 2017, while the RTX 4080 SUPER arrived in 2024, and the architecture gap shows in every measured metric.

For users selecting between these two, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the only sensible option for general compute, gaming, or content creation, assuming the higher 320 W power draw and triple-slot cooler are acceptable. The Vega 64’s integrated form factor with no power connectors might suit specific portable or space-constrained systems, but its performance ceiling is far lower. The RTX 4080 SUPER’s launch MSRP is 999 USD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 5 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 45,900 million |

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.3M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1250 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1350 MHz | 2550 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 786 MHz, 1572 Mbps effective | 1438 MHz, 23 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 2048 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 736.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 10240 |

| TMUs | 256 | 320 |

| ROPs | 64 | 112 |

| RT Cores | None | 80 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 320 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 285.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 345.6 GTexel/s | 816.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 11.06 TFLOPS | 52.22 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1) | 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 320 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Triple-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 700 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Vulkan Version | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2017-06-26 | 2024-01-30 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 SUPER wins every shared benchmark and dominates on raw specification fronts. Its FP32 throughput is 4.7 times higher, its texture rate is 2.4 times higher, and its pixel rate is 3.3 times higher. Memory bandwidth is 83% greater. For any standard compute workload, including OpenCL and Vulkan compute, the NVIDIA card is faster by margins that make the comparison one-sided. The ray tracing and tensor core hardware also opens workloads that the Vega 64 cannot accelerate at all.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins only in specific structural aspects: it uses a 2048-bit memory bus, which is 8 times wider than NVIDIA’s 256-bit interface, and it draws 70 W less power. Its HBM2 memory may offer different latency characteristics, though the benchmark data does not quantify this. The Vega card is an integrated GPU with no external power connectors, which could be an advantage in systems where physical space and power cabling are restricted. Its longer production history, with a 2017 release, means it predates the RTX 4080 SUPER by roughly six and a half years.

For gaming, professional rendering, or AI inference, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the only viable choice based on the measured scores. For a compact, low-power integrated system where benchmark performance is secondary, the Vega 64 might still find a niche. However, the recorded head-to-head results leave no ambiguity: the RTX 4080 SUPER outperforms the Radeon Pro Vega 64 by 67.5% to 71.5% in the only two tests where both cards appear, and its architectural advantages extend to every compute category in the specification sheets.