AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo vs NVIDIA CMP 30HX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two GPUs into entirely different performance classes. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo wins both recorded head-to-head tests, and the margins are substantial. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD part scores 98,432 against 65,199 for the NVIDIA CMP 30HX, a 51% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens to 58.9%, with the AMD card posting 99,296 versus 62,484. There is no benchmark category where the NVIDIA CMP 30HX emerges ahead.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo occupies the 94th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 106,750. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (average score 107,342, only 0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II (109,617, 2.6% higher), and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725, 3.6% higher). The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 trails by 4.8% with an average score of 101,872. This places the Duo firmly in professional workstation territory, where absolute compute throughput matters more than efficiency.

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX sits at the 89th percentile, which is still respectable, but its average benchmark score of 63,842 is roughly 40% lower than the AMD card's average. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around the same performance level: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP matches it exactly at 63,830 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 7600M is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 is 0.2% ahead, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is 0.6% behind. The CMP 30HX was designed for a different workload entirely: mining operations where display output and compute versatility are secondary.

The use-case split is clear from the data. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo is for compute-heavy professional tasks: rendering, simulation, and large dataset processing. Its 32 GB of HBM2 memory and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth indicate a device built for massive memory footprints. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX, with no display outputs and a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, is a specialized mining card. It wins no benchmark comparison in this database, and its specifications reflect a stripped-down design optimized for a single repetitive workload.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and philosophical. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo uses the Vega 20 chip built on GCN 5.1 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The die contains 13,230 million transistors across a 331 mm² area, yielding a transistor density of 40.0 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip based on Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. Its die holds 6,600 million transistors across 284 mm², for a density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip packs roughly twice the transistors into a 16.5% larger die, a direct consequence of the more advanced process node.

The memory subsystems could not be more different. The AMD card uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock is 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA card uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s. Its memory clock is 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective. The AMD card has 3x the capacity and roughly 3x the bandwidth, though the NVIDIA card uses faster-clocked memory chips on a narrower interface.

Compute resource counts follow the same pattern. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo has 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Neither card has dedicated RT cores or tensor cores in the recorded data. The AMD card's pixel rate is 110.1 GPixel/s versus 85.68 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA card, a 28.5% lead. The texture rate gap is larger: 440.3 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s, a 180% advantage for AMD. FP32 throughput is 14.09 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 28.18 TFLOPS versus 10.05 TFLOPS, both at 2:1 ratios.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has a higher base clock at 1530 MHz versus 1400 MHz, and a higher boost clock at 1785 MHz versus 1720 MHz. The NVIDIA card achieves its higher clocks on an older, less dense process, but with far fewer compute units to feed. The AMD card compensates with sheer unit count and memory bandwidth.

Physical and interface differences are stark. The AMD card is quad-slot with an Apple MPX bus interface, while the NVIDIA card is dual-slot with a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface and a single 8-pin power connector. The AMD card has no recorded power connector data but requires a suggested 850 W PSU. The NVIDIA card requires a 300 W PSU. The AMD card has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt), while the NVIDIA card has no display outputs at all.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests both favor the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, and the margins are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD card scores 98,432 against the NVIDIA CMP 30HX's 65,199, a 51% delta. This is the smaller of the two gaps, but it still represents a massive performance differential. OpenCL workloads often scale with raw shading unit count and memory bandwidth, both of which heavily favor the AMD card.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD card scores 99,296 against 62,484 for the NVIDIA card, a 58.9% delta. The Vulkan gap is even wider than OpenCL, suggesting that the AMD architecture responds better to the lower-overhead API. The NVIDIA card's Vulkan score is actually lower than its OpenCL score (62,484 versus 65,199), while the AMD card's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score (99,296 versus 98,432). This indicates the AMD card scales better across different API environments.

The average benchmark scores reinforce these results. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo averages 106,750 across its three recorded tests (Geekbench Metal 122,522, Geekbench OpenCL 98,432, and Geekbench Vulkan 99,296). The NVIDIA CMP 30HX averages 63,842 across its two recorded tests (OpenCL 65,199 and Vulkan 62,484). The delta between the averages is approximately 67% in favor of the AMD card.

The database records 2 wins for the AMD card and 0 for the NVIDIA card. There is no test in the head-to-head set where the NVIDIA part takes the lead. The closest the NVIDIA card comes is in OpenCL, where it reaches 66.2% of the AMD card's score. In Vulkan, it reaches only 62.9%. Neither result approaches parity.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show divergence in every major category. Process node differs: 7 nm for AMD versus 12 nm for NVIDIA. Transistor count differs: 13,230 million versus 6,600 million. Die size differs: 331 mm² versus 284 mm². Transistor density differs: 40.0M per mm² versus 23.2M per mm².

Memory configuration differs completely: 32 GB HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus versus 6 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. Bandwidth is 1.02 TB/s versus 336.0 GB/s. Memory clock is 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The AMD card uses a wider, slower, higher-capacity memory system; the NVIDIA card uses a narrower, faster, lower-capacity one.

Compute unit counts differ: 4,096 shading units versus 1,408, 256 TMUs versus 88, and 64 ROPs versus 48. Pixel rate is 110.1 GPixel/s versus 85.68 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 440.3 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s. FP32 is 14.09 TFLOPS versus 5.027 TFLOPS. FP16 is 28.18 TFLOPS versus 10.05 TFLOPS.

Clock speeds differ in the NVIDIA card's favor: base 1530 MHz versus 1400 MHz, boost 1785 MHz versus 1720 MHz. The NVIDIA card also has a lower TDP at 125 W versus 475 W. Slot width differs: quad-slot versus dual-slot. The NVIDIA card has a 1x 8-pin power connector; the AMD card has no recorded power connector data. Suggested PSU is 850 W for AMD versus 300 W for NVIDIA. Bus interface is Apple MPX versus PCIe 1.0 x4. Display outputs are present on AMD (1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt) versus absent on NVIDIA.

API support differs slightly: both support DirectX 12 (12_1), both support OpenGL 4.6, but the NVIDIA card supports Vulkan 1.4 while the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.3. Physical dimensions are recorded only for the NVIDIA card: 229 mm length, 111 mm height, 35 mm width.

Release dates differ by nearly two years: the AMD card launched 2019-06-02, the NVIDIA card launched 2021-02-24. Both are end-of-life. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 4,399 USD. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 799 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput in the recorded benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo wins both head-to-head tests. It scores 98,432 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 65,199 for the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (51% higher), and 99,296 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 62,484 (58.9% higher).

Q: How do the memory systems compare between the two cards?

A: The AMD card uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has roughly 3x the capacity and 3x the bandwidth.

Q: What is the performance gap in average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo averages 106,750 across its recorded tests, while the NVIDIA CMP 30HX averages 63,842. The AMD card's average is approximately 67% higher.

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has higher clocks: 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, versus 1400 MHz base and 1720 MHz boost for the AMD card. Despite this, the AMD card delivers significantly higher compute throughput due to its larger number of shading units.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The NVIDIA card supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.3. The AMD card also has recorded Geekbench Metal performance (122,522), which is not tested for the NVIDIA card.

Q: What are the physical differences in form factor?

A: The AMD card is quad-slot with an Apple MPX bus interface, while the NVIDIA card is dual-slot with PCIe 1.0 x4 and dimensions of 229 mm length, 111 mm height, and 35 mm width. The AMD card has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt); the NVIDIA card has no display outputs.