AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two cards into very different usage profiles. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti dominates the shared benchmark workload, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X has a narrower set of strengths tied to its mobile integration.

In the only head-to-head benchmark available (Geekbench OpenCL), the RTX 3090 Ti wins outright. It scores 174,441 versus 78,467 for the Pro Vega 64X, a 122.3% advantage. That is not a marginal lead; it is more than double the raw compute output in this particular test. The RTX 3090 Ti also holds wins in the broader database: it appears in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 5,741 and Geekbench Vulkan with 215,633. The Vega 64X has no entries in those tests, so any workload that leans on those APIs goes exclusively to the NVIDIA card.

The AMD card wins in one specific domain: Geekbench Metal, where it scores 83,450. The RTX 3090 Ti has no recorded Metal score. That makes the Vega 64X the only option here for applications that rely on Apple's Metal graphics API. This is consistent with its "Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series)" generation label. Its average benchmark score sits at 80,959, which places it in the 92nd percentile of all GPUs. The RTX 3090 Ti averages 131,938 and sits in the 95th percentile.

The use-case split is clear. For heavy compute, modern API support, and raw throughput, the RTX 3090 Ti wins every measurable contest. The Vega 64X only leads in the Metal-specific benchmark, which is not a head-to-head comparison but still a distinct strength. The data does not show any other area where the AMD card outperforms the NVIDIA card.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures from different process nodes. The RTX 3090 Ti uses the GA102 chip on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, fabricated on a Samsung 8 nm process. It packs 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. The Vega 64X uses the Vega 10 chip with AMD's GCN 5.0 architecture, made on a GlobalFoundries 14 nm process. It has 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, with 25.3 million transistors per square millimeter.

The memory systems are fundamentally different. The RTX 3090 Ti uses 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384 bit bus, delivering 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 64X uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a much wider 2048 bit bus, but at 512 GB/s the bandwidth is roughly half. The RTX 3090 Ti also has a far higher memory clock: 1,313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) versus 1,000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) for the AMD card.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The RTX 3090 Ti has 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 ROPs. It also has 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, which the Vega 64X lacks entirely (the fields are null). The Vega 64X has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. These numbers directly explain the performance gap.

Clock speeds differ as well. The RTX 3090 Ti runs at a base of 1,560 MHz and boosts to 1,860 MHz. The Vega 64X starts at 1,250 MHz base and boosts to 1,468 MHz. The NVIDIA card is both faster per clock and has more parallel hardware.

Power and physical design are also distinct. The RTX 3090 Ti has a 450 W TDP, requires a 850 W suggested PSU, takes a triple-slot cooler, and uses a 16-pin connector. The Vega 64X has a 250 W TDP, no power connectors, and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with portable-device-dependent display outputs. That explains why the AMD card has no listed dimensions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There is exactly one recorded head-to-head benchmark: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are decisive. The RTX 3090 Ti scores 174,441. The Vega 64X scores 78,462. The delta is 122.3%, meaning the NVIDIA card is more than twice as fast in this test.

In the broader database, the RTX 3090 Ti extends its lead. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX score is 5,741, which is a modern DirectX 12 workload. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 215,633, higher than its OpenCL result. The Vega 64X has no equivalent scores in those tests, so we cannot construct a direct percentage comparison, but the absence of data means those workloads are entirely in the NVIDIA card's domain.

Look at the nearest rivals for context. The RTX 3090 Ti's average score of 131,938 puts it just 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA L4 (131,072) and 2.4% behind the RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218) and A10M (135,230). It is also 2.6% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396). The Vega 64X's average of 80,959 is 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 (81,995), but it leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 (79,842) by 1.4% and the Tesla P100 variants (79,605 and 79,396) by 1.7% and 2.0%, respectively.

These rival comparisons show that the RTX 3090 Ti, despite being a generation old, still occupies the upper segment of GPUs, while the Vega 64X is in a lower performance tier. The 95th percentile versus 92nd percentile gap in the overall database confirms this.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves little room for ambiguity. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti is the faster card in every benchmark that both cards appear in. It has more compute units, higher clock speeds, more memory, and a wider memory interface. Its 122.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the only direct comparative measurement, and it is overwhelming.

Who should pick the RTX 3090 Ti? Anyone who needs raw compute performance, modern API support (Vulkan, DirectX 12 Ultimate), or ray tracing. The card's RT cores and tensor cores are present in the specification, even if no benchmark directly tests them in this pack. Its 24 GB of memory and 1.01 TB/s bandwidth are the largest in this comparison. It also comes with a broader set of display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), which is more versatile than the Vega 64X's portable-device-dependent outputs.

Who should pick the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X? Only those who specifically require Metal support. The card's Geekbench Metal score of 83,450 is the only recorded benchmark where the NVIDIA card has no entry. If a workflow is tied to Apple's Metal API, the Vega 64X is the only option here. It also has lower power draw (250 W versus 450 W) and no power connector, which may suit certain compact or integrated systems, but that is a physical attribute, not a performance benefit.

The verdict from the database is straightforward: the RTX 3090 Ti wins on performance across the board. The Vega 64X wins only on platform compatibility for Metal-based environments. There is no third category.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3090 Ti than the Vega 64X in OpenCL?

A: The RTX 3090 Ti scores 174,441 versus 78,467, a 122.3% lead.

Q: Does the Vega 64X have ray tracing cores?

A: No, the RT core field is null. It has no ray tracing hardware, while the RTX 3090 Ti has 84 RT cores.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 3090 Ti has 1.01 TB/s, while the Vega 64X has 512 GB/s.

Q: Is the Vega 64X a desktop card?

A: No, it is listed as an IGP with "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs, and has no dimensions or power connectors.

Q: How does the Vega 64X compare to its closest rivals?

A: It is 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6600, and 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090, and 2% ahead of the Tesla P100 12 GB.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the RTX 3090 Ti?

A: The launch MSRP is 1,999 USD. The Vega 64X has no recorded MSRP.

Q: Which card supports more modern DirectX?

A: The RTX 3090 Ti supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Vega 64X supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 5.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries)|

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

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 495 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 1560 MHz | 1250 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1860 MHz | 1468 MHz |

| Memory | 24 GB GDDR6X | 16 GB HBM2 |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.01 TB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 10752 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 336 | 256 |

| ROPs | 112 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 84 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 336 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 208.3 GPixel/s | 93.95 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 625.0 GTexel/s | 375.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 40.00 TFLOPS | 12.03 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 40.00 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.05 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 450 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | IGP |

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

| Suggested PSU | 850 W | Not specified |

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

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

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Release Date | 2022-01-26 | 2019-03-18 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,999 USD | Not specified |

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

The specification table highlights the breadth of the gap. Every compute metric favors the NVIDIA card, and the only AMD advantage is the wider memory bus (2048 versus 384 bits), which does not translate into higher bandwidth. The RTX 3090 Ti also has a newer PCIe interface (4.0 versus 3.0) and a more recent release date. The Vega 64X is an older, lower-power, integrated part designed for a different use case.