AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs NVIDIA L4 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data positions these two GPUs in completely different segments despite both being professional-oriented parts. The NVIDIA L4 is the clear performance leader in every recorded head-to-head test, delivering a 98.1% higher OpenCL score and a 63.5% higher Vulkan score than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64. The L4 also sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Vega 64 sits at the 91st percentile, though the raw average benchmark gap is substantial: 131,072 versus 72,379.

The L4 is the choice for anyone needing maximum compute throughput in a low-power, single-slot form factor. Its 72 W TDP, 24 GB GDDR6 memory, and 30.29 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it suited for datacenter inference, AI workloads, and rendering tasks where density and efficiency matter. The Vega 64, with its 250 W TDP and 16 GB HBM2, remains competitive in its own right but is firmly a previous-generation product, now marked end-of-life. The data suggests the Vega 64 is best for legacy Mac Pro environments or workloads that specifically require its 402.4 GB/s HBM2 bandwidth, but for any new deployment, the L4 is the superior pick based on measured scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA L4 records an average benchmark score of 131,072, which is 81.1% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64's 72,379. The L4 outperforms the Vega 64 in both shared tests: OpenCL (140,838 vs 71,094) and Vulkan (121,306 vs 74,174).

Q: How does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Vega 64's average score of 72,379 places it 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (72,098), 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6650M (71,768), and 2.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829), while trailing the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition by 1.4% (73,370).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The NVIDIA L4 features 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 300.1 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, providing 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. Despite the Vega 64's higher bandwidth, the L4 achieves better benchmark scores.

Q: Which GPU supports hardware ray tracing?

A: The NVIDIA L4 includes 60 RT cores as part of its Ada Lovelace architecture. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has no RT cores listed in the database, meaning it lacks dedicated hardware ray tracing acceleration.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The NVIDIA L4 has a TDP of 72 W with no power connectors required and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has a TDP of 250 W with no power connectors listed and no suggested PSU figure recorded. The L4 is substantially more power-efficient.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The NVIDIA L4 scores 121,306 in the Geekbench Vulkan test, which is 63.5% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64's 74,174. The L4 also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 64 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA L4 is built on the AD104 chip using the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The architecture includes 7,424 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, 80 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses the Vega 10 chip with the older GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 12,500 million transistors spread across a larger 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of just 25.3M per mm². The Vega 64 has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but no RT cores or tensor cores. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

The architectural gap is significant. The L4's newer 5 nm process allows for more than double the transistor count on a smaller die, while also enabling features like dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores that the Vega 64 lacks entirely. The Vega 64's GCN architecture is over six years older, reflected in its lower feature set and reduced efficiency. The L4's FP16 performance runs at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 at 30.29 TFLOPS, while the Vega 64's FP16 is 2:1, delivering 22.12 TFLOPS against its 11.06 TFLOPS FP32.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The NVIDIA L4 uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The L4 has 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, versus the Vega 64's 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die. Clock speeds differ substantially: the L4 runs at a 795 MHz base and 2040 MHz boost, while the Vega 64 runs at 1250 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost. Memory configurations also diverge: the L4 has 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 300.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega 64 has 16 GB HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth.

The compute resources show the L4's advantage: 7,424 shading units versus 4,096, 240 TMUs versus 256, and 80 ROPs versus 64. The L4 adds 60 RT cores and 240 tensor cores, while the Vega 64 has none. Pixel and texture rates favor the L4 at 163.2 GPixel/s and 489.6 GTexel/s, versus 86.40 GPixel/s and 345.6 GTexel/s for the Vega 64. FP32 performance is 30.29 TFLOPS for the L4 versus 11.06 TFLOPS for the Vega 64.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The L4 has a 72 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The Vega 64 has a 250 W TDP, is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor for Mac), and has no suggested PSU. The L4 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Vega 64 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The L4 has no display outputs, while the Vega 64's outputs are portable device dependent. The L4 measures 169 mm in length and 56 mm in height, while the Vega 64 has no recorded dimensions. The L4 was released on 2023-03-20 and is active in production, while the Vega 64 was released on 2017-06-26 and is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA L4 in both shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the L4 scores 140,838 against the Vega 64's 71,094, a delta of 98.1% in favor of the L4. That is nearly double the AMD card's output, a massive margin that reflects both the architectural generation gap and the L4's higher shading unit count and clock speeds.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the L4 again dominates with a score of 121,306 versus 74,174 for the Vega 64, a 63.5% advantage. While the gap narrows compared to OpenCL, it remains substantial. The Vega 64's best single benchmark is its Vulkan score at 74,174, which still falls 47,132 points short of the L4's Vulkan result. The Vega 64's Metal benchmark of 71,868 has no direct comparison in the L4's data, but it aligns closely with its OpenCL and Vulkan scores, indicating consistent performance across APIs.

The L4's average benchmark score of 131,072 puts it just 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti (131,938) and 3.1% behind both the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218) and NVIDIA A10M (135,230). It also trails the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396) by 3.2%. These are close margins, positioning the L4 as a high-end performer among its peers.

The Vega 64's average of 72,379 sits in a much lower performance tier. It leads the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (72,098) by just 0.4% and the AMD Radeon RX 6650M (71,768) by 0.9%, while trailing the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition (73,370) by 1.4%. The Vega 64's nearest rival group consists of cards from 2016 and 2022, highlighting its mid-range positioning relative to modern hardware.

The win count is 2 for the L4 and 0 for the Vega 64 across the shared tests. No benchmark in the database shows the Vega 64 ahead. The data consistently indicates that the L4 is the superior GPU in raw compute performance, despite the Vega 64's higher memory bandwidth. This suggests that the L4's newer architecture, higher clock speeds, and greater shading unit count more than compensate for the Vega 64's memory bandwidth advantage in the recorded workloads.