AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

# AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal

The benchmark data places these two end-of-life flagships in a dead heat: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 averages 72,379 across Geekbench tests, while NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal sits at 72,098 — a 0.4% gap that is statistically negligible. Both cards rank in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, meaning they deliver near-identical overall performance despite radically different architectures, memory designs, and release timelines. The real story is not who wins outright, but how each card wins different workloads, with the AMD card taking OpenCL by 6.6% and the NVIDIA card taking Vulkan by 4.3%.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 leads with an average benchmark score of 72,379, compared to NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal's 72,098. The difference is a mere 0.4%, placing both cards in the 91st percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins Geekbench OpenCL decisively, scoring 71,094 against NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal's 66,696. That is a 6.6% advantage for the AMD card.

Q: Which card performs better in Vulkan workloads?

A: NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal takes the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 77,499, while AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 trails at 74,174. The NVIDIA card leads by 4.3% in this API.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 480.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. However, they differ in Vulkan support: AMD lists Vulkan 1.3, while NVIDIA lists Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the release date and production status of these cards?

A: NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal was released on August 1, 2016, and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 followed on June 26, 2017. Both are now end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies. AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal uses the GP102 chip on the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 16 nm process at TSMC. Despite the process node difference, both chips pack nearly identical transistor counts: 12,500 million for AMD versus 11,800 million for NVIDIA, with die sizes of 495 mm² and 471 mm² respectively.

The compute resources differ substantially. AMD fields 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA counters with 3,584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. This translates to different peak rates: AMD reaches 86.40 GPixel/s pixel fill rate and 345.6 GTexel/s texture rate, while NVIDIA achieves 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s. In raw floating-point throughput, AMD's 11.06 TFLOPS FP32 slightly edges NVIDIA's 10.97 TFLOPS, but the gap widens dramatically in FP16: AMD delivers 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus NVIDIA's paltry 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio).

Memory architecture is another clear divergence. AMD pairs 16 GB of HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, yielding 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA pairs 12 GB of GDDR5X with a 384-bit bus, achieving 480.4 GB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds also differ: AMD runs at a 1250 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost, while NVIDIA runs at 1417 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost. Both cards consume 250 W TDP, but their physical designs differ — AMD is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no power connectors, while NVIDIA is a dual-slot card requiring 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data supports a split decision based on workload. For OpenCL-heavy applications, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is the clear choice, delivering 71,094 versus 66,696 — a 6.6% advantage that represents the largest margin in any benchmark. For Vulkan-based workloads, NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal takes the crown with 77,499 versus 74,174, a 4.3% lead. The average scores are so close (72,379 vs 72,098) that neither card can claim overall superiority.

Choose AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 if your primary applications leverage OpenCL and benefit from 16 GB of HBM2 memory and double-precision FP16 compute. The 2:1 FP16 ratio is a massive advantage for compute tasks. Choose NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal if you prioritize Vulkan performance, higher pixel fill rate (147.0 GPixel/s vs 86.40 GPixel/s), and greater memory bandwidth (480.4 GB/s vs 402.4 GB/s). The NVIDIA card also supports the newer Vulkan 1.4 API, while AMD is limited to 1.3.

For users who need a drop-in board with standard power connectors, NVIDIA's dual-slot design with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors is more practical. AMD's IGP form factor with no power connectors suggests it is intended for integrated systems. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 | NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 16 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 11,800 million |

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 471 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1250 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1350 MHz | 1531 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 2048 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 480.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 256 | 224 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 147.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 345.6 GTexel/s | 342.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 11.06 TFLOPS | 10.97 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1) | 171.5 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2017-06-26 | 2016-08-01 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a perfect split: one win for each card. In Geekbench OpenCL, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 scores 71,094 against NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal's 66,696, a 6.6% victory. This is the single largest performance gap between the two cards in any test. The AMD card's massive FP16 throughput of 22.12 TFLOPS likely contributes to this OpenCL dominance, as OpenCL workloads often exploit half-precision compute.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the tables turn. NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal scores 77,499, while AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 manages 74,174 — a 4.3% margin for NVIDIA. This Vulkan advantage aligns with NVIDIA's newer API support (Vulkan 1.4 vs 1.3) and higher pixel rate of 147.0 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card's higher boost clock of 1531 MHz versus 1350 MHz may also play a role in rasterization-heavy Vulkan tests.

The average benchmark scores confirm the near-parity: AMD's 72,379 is just 0.4% ahead of NVIDIA's 72,098. Both cards sit at the 91st percentile of all GPUs. Notably, the nearest rival to both is AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition at 73,370, which beats both cards by 1.4% (AMD) and 1.7% (NVIDIA). AMD Radeon RX 6650M trails at 71,768, within 0.9% of the Pro Vega 64 and 0.5% of the TITAN X. AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE is further back at 70,829, 2.2% behind the Pro Vega 64 and 1.8% behind the TITAN X.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 wins in OpenCL compute workloads. The 6.6% OpenCL advantage (71,094 vs 66,696) is the largest margin in any benchmark. With 16 GB of HBM2 memory, 4096 shading units, and 22.12 TFLOPS FP16 performance (2:1 ratio), this card is built for compute-heavy tasks that leverage half-precision arithmetic. The 2048-bit memory bus provides massive parallelism for memory-intensive applications, even though raw bandwidth is lower than NVIDIA's.

NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal wins in Vulkan-based rendering and higher fill-rate scenarios. The 4.3% Vulkan win (77,499 vs 74,174) demonstrates superior performance in modern graphics APIs. The 147.0 GPixel/s pixel rate is 70% higher than AMD's 86.40 GPixel/s, making it better suited for high-resolution rasterization with heavy overdraw. The 480.4 GB/s memory bandwidth and 96 ROPs give NVIDIA an edge in texture-heavy and pixel-bound workloads. The dual-slot form factor with standard power connectors also makes it more readily deployable in conventional desktop systems.

For video memory capacity, AMD wins with 16 GB versus 12 GB. This 4 GB difference matters for large datasets or high-resolution textures that approach the 12 GB limit. However, NVIDIA's higher bandwidth and faster clocks may compensate in scenarios where capacity is not the bottleneck.

For API compatibility, NVIDIA wins with Vulkan 1.4 support versus AMD's Vulkan 1.3, while both match on DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The FP32 compute is essentially tied (11.06 vs 10.97 TFLOPS), and texture rates are nearly identical (345.6 vs 342.9 GTexel/s). The 0.4% average score difference is within measurement noise, making the choice workload-dependent rather than performance-dependent.