AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 and NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile are both end-of-life professional graphics solutions, yet they target fundamentally different physical realities. The Vega 64 is a desktop-class integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 250 W power envelope, while the A3000 Mobile is a 70 W notebook part. Benchmark results show a split decision: each wins one of the two shared tests, with the NVIDIA pulling ahead by 10.1% in OpenCL and the AMD countering with a 21.2% lead in Vulkan. Their average benchmark scores sit within 3.2% of each other (72379 vs 70140), placing both in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. This near-parity in overall performance, despite radically different power budgets and architectures, makes the choice heavily dependent on workload and platform.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile dominates in OpenCL compute. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 79091 surpasses the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64's 71094 by a decisive 10.1% margin. This is the single largest performance gap in the head-to-head data, and it matters for any application that relies on OpenCL as its primary compute interface. The A3000's advantage here is consistent with its Ampere architecture's design priorities, which include dedicated tensor cores and RT cores that can assist in certain compute tasks. For users running OpenCL-based rendering, simulation, or data-processing workloads, the data clearly favors the NVIDIA part.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins in Vulkan, and it wins big. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 74174 beats the A3000 Mobile's 61189 by a substantial 21.2% delta. This is not a marginal victory; it is a commanding lead that suggests the Vega architecture's GCN 5.0 design handles Vulkan's explicit, low-overhead API model particularly well. Games and applications built on Vulkan will see a noticeable performance benefit from the AMD GPU. Furthermore, the Vega 64's 16 GB of HBM2 memory versus the A3000's 6 GB of GDDR6 gives it a theoretical capacity advantage for large datasets, though the A3000's 264.0 GB/s bandwidth is more modest than expected given the generational leap.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the Vega 64 also holds a slight edge in average score. Its 72379 average bests the A3000's 70140 by roughly 3.2%. However, this average is calculated from three tests (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan) for the AMD and only two (OpenCL, Vulkan) for the NVIDIA. The Vega 64's Metal score of 71868 is its weakest result, yet it still contributes to a higher overall average. The A3000 has no Metal result in the data, so its average relies solely on its strong OpenCL showing and weak Vulkan result.

The Verdict

Choose the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile if your primary workloads are OpenCL-based. The 10.1% OpenCL advantage is substantial and directly translates to faster compute times in that API. This GPU is also the only sensible option for a laptop or compact mobile workstation, given its 70 W TDP versus the Vega 64's 250 W requirement. The A3000's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 also makes it more future-proof for modern graphics features like ray tracing, though the data does not include specific ray-tracing benchmarks.

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 if Vulkan performance is your priority. The 21.2% Vulkan lead is the largest single-test margin in the comparison and cannot be ignored for Vulkan-native applications. The Vega 64 also offers more than double the memory capacity (16 GB vs 6 GB), which is critical for large texture sets or compute datasets that exceed 6 GB. Its higher average benchmark score (72379 vs 70140) suggests slightly better all-around performance, but this is tempered by its lack of dedicated RT and tensor cores and its status as an integrated part with no upgrade path.

For a desktop workstation with available power headroom, the Vega 64's raw throughput and memory capacity make it a compelling choice despite its age. For any mobile or power-constrained scenario, the A3000 Mobile is the only viable option, and its OpenCL strength is a genuine asset. If your software stack is API-agnostic, the data slightly favors the AMD in average score, but the NVIDIA's efficiency and modern feature set may tip the balance in real-world usage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs share exactly two benchmark results in the data, and each claims one victory. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79091 against the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64's 71094. This is a 10.1% delta in NVIDIA's favor, meaning the A3000 completes OpenCL tasks roughly 11% faster than the Vega 64. This is a meaningful difference for any compute-heavy workflow that scales with raw throughput.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells the opposite story. Here, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 scores 74174, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile manages only 61189. The delta is 21.2% in AMD's favor, a massive swing that nearly doubles the NVIDIA's OpenCL advantage. This suggests the Vega 64's GCN 5.0 architecture is significantly better optimized for Vulkan's draw-call handling and explicit command queues, despite having no dedicated ray-tracing hardware.

Notably, the A3000 Mobile has no Metal benchmark result in the data, while the Vega 64 posts a Metal score of 71868. This Metal score sits between its OpenCL and Vulkan results, indicating consistent performance across Apple's API. The absence of a Metal score for the NVIDIA means the comparison is incomplete for macOS users, but the available data shows the Vega 64 as the stronger Vulkan performer and the A3000 as the stronger OpenCL performer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has an average benchmark score of 72379, which is 3.2% higher than the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile's 70140. Both GPUs rank in the 91st percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 scores 74174 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile scores 61189. This represents a 21.2% lead for the AMD GPU.

Q: Does the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile support any APIs the AMD does not?

A: Yes. The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has 16 GB of HBM2 memory, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. The AMD also has a wider 2048-bit bus versus the NVIDIA's 192-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile includes 32 RT cores and 128 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has no RT cores or tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 has a TDP of 250 W, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile has a TDP of 70 W. The AMD is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), while the NVIDIA is a mobile part.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is built on the Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured 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 A3000 Mobile uses the GA104 chip with the Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a smaller 392 mm² die, achieving a much higher transistor density of 44.4M per mm².

These architectural differences manifest in several key ways. The AMD features 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The NVIDIA also has 4096 shading units and 64 ROPs, but only 128 TMUs. This means the AMD has double the texture fill rate (345.6 GTexel/s vs 157.4 GTexel/s) and a higher pixel rate (86.40 GPixel/s vs 78.72 GPixel/s). However, the NVIDIA compensates with 32 RT cores and 128 tensor cores, which the AMD lacks entirely.

The Vega 64's FP32 throughput is 11.06 TFLOPS, slightly ahead of the A3000's 10.08 TFLOPS. However, the AMD achieves 22.12 TFLOPS FP16 via a 2:1 rate, while the NVIDIA's FP16 is 10.08 TFLOPS at a 1:1 rate. This means the AMD has a massive theoretical FP16 advantage, but only in workloads that can exploit 2:1 shader packing. The NVIDIA's FP16 is more straightforward but lower in raw numbers.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses a 14 nm process, while the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile uses 8 nm. Transistor counts are 12,500 million for AMD versus 17,400 million for NVIDIA, with die sizes of 495 mm² and 392 mm² respectively. Clock speeds are dramatically different: the AMD runs at 1250 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA runs at a much lower 600 MHz base and 1230 MHz boost, reflecting its mobile power constraints.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The AMD offers 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA offers 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 264.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks are 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) for the AMD and 1375 MHz (11 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA. The AMD's memory bandwidth is 52% higher, but the NVIDIA's GDDR6 runs at a much faster effective speed per pin.

Power and interface specs further separate them. The AMD has a 250 W TDP and is classified as an IGP with no power connectors, relying on the host system. The NVIDIA has a 70 W TDP and also uses no power connectors. The AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both have "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs. The AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3; the NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD was released on 2017-06-26, while the NVIDIA followed on 2021-04-11.