AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo vs NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation Comparison

# NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo

The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation and AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo represent two very different approaches to professional graphics. The Ada card is a modern, monolithic workstation GPU built on a 5 nm process, while the Vega II Duo is an older, dual-die Mac-specific module from 2019. The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the RTX 4500 Ada winning both shared tests by wide margins. However, the Vega II Duo retains advantages in memory capacity and bandwidth that matter for specific workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation is the clear winner in raw compute performance across the benchmarks shared in the database. It wins both head-to-head tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In OpenCL, the Ada card scores 160,786 versus the Vega II Duo's 98,432, a 63.3% advantage. In Vulkan, the gap widens to 72.6%, with scores of 171,401 against 99,296. This dominance in general-purpose compute and graphics APIs suggests the Ada card is better suited for tasks that stress the GPU's shading units, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores. The Vega II Duo, despite its dual-die configuration, cannot match the sheer throughput of the newer architecture.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo does win on memory capacity and bandwidth. It offers 32 GB of HBM2 memory with a 4096-bit bus and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4500 Ada has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-bound, such as large dataset processing or high-resolution texture streaming, the Vega II Duo's superior memory subsystem could provide a tangible benefit. Its 2:1 FP16 ratio (28.18 TFLOPS) also exceeds the Ada card's 1:1 FP16 (39.63 TFLOPS), but the Ada card still delivers higher peak FP16 throughput overall.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The RTX 4500 Ada uses the AD103 chip based on NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process. It packs 45,900 million transistors into a 379 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm². The Vega II Duo uses the Vega 20 chip based on AMD's GCN 5.1 architecture, on a 7 nm process. It contains 13,230 million transistors across a 331 mm² die, with a density of 40.0 million per mm². The Ada chip is denser and more modern, allowing it to fit more compute units per area.

The Ada card features 7,680 shading units, 240 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 60 RT cores, and 240 tensor cores. It reaches a pixel rate of 206.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 619.2 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 39.63 TFLOPS. The Vega II Duo, despite its dual-die design, has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It does not have dedicated RT or tensor cores, relying on GCN's compute units for all work. Its pixel rate is 110.1 GPixel/s and texture rate is 440.3 GTexel/s, with FP32 at 14.09 TFLOPS. The Ada card has a 2.8x advantage in FP32 throughput, which aligns with the benchmark deltas.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The Ada card runs at a base of 2070 MHz and boosts to 2580 MHz, while the Vega II Duo runs at 1400 MHz base and 1720 MHz boost. Memory clocks are even more divergent: the Ada card uses 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) GDDR6, while the Vega II Duo uses 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) HBM2. The HBM2's wider bus compensates for the lower clock, but the Ada card's higher-clocked GDDR6 is more efficient per bit.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the first shared benchmark. The RTX 4500 Ada scores 160,786, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Vega II Duo scores 98,432, sitting in the 94th percentile. The delta of 63.3% is substantial. To put this in context, the Ada card's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A5500 with an average score of 165,217 (only 0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 at 164,894 (0.7% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X at 168,574 (1.5% higher). The Vega II Duo, by contrast, sits near the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X at 107,342 (0.6% lower) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II at 109,617 (2.6% lower). This places the two cards in different performance tiers entirely: the Ada card competes with modern workstation flagships, while the Vega II Duo is closer to mid-range or previous-generation parts.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows an even larger gap. The Ada card scores 171,401, while the Vega II Duo scores 99,296, a 72.6% difference. Vulkan is a low-level API that benefits from efficient scheduling and modern hardware features. The Ada card's dedicated RT and tensor cores, combined with its higher clock speeds and larger shading unit count, likely explain this advantage. The Vega II Duo's GCN architecture, which predates Vulkan 1.3 support, cannot extract the same level of performance from the API. The Vega II Duo does support Vulkan 1.3, but its older design limits throughput.

The database also records a Geekbench Metal score for the Vega II Duo of 122,522, which is higher than its OpenCL score. This reflects the card's Mac-centric design; Metal is Apple's API and the Vega II Duo is built for the Apple MPX bus. The RTX 4500 Ada has no Metal score recorded, so a direct comparison in that API is impossible. However, the OpenCL and Vulkan results strongly suggest the Ada card would be faster in most cross-platform workloads.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation is the superior GPU for general-purpose compute and graphics. It wins both shared benchmarks by margins of 63.3% and 72.6%, and it ranks in the 97th percentile of all GPUs versus the Vega II Duo's 94th percentile. Its architecture is newer, its process node is smaller, and it offers dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores that the Vega II Duo lacks. For professionals running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the Ada card is the clear choice.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo still has a niche. Its 32 GB of HBM2 memory with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth is a significant asset for memory-intensive tasks. It also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, though the Ada card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The Vega II Duo's power draw is 475 W, versus the Ada card's 210 W, and it requires an 850 W PSU versus 550 W. The Vega II Duo is also a quad-slot card with no standard power connectors, designed for Apple MPX slots, while the Ada card is a dual-slot card with no external power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The Vega II Duo is end-of-life, while the Ada card is still active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation. It scores 160,786 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 98,432 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, a 63.3% advantage, and 171,401 versus 99,296 in Vulkan, a 72.6% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo have more memory?

A: Yes. The Vega II Duo has 32 GB of HBM2 memory with a 4096-bit bus and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4500 Ada has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The RTX 4500 Ada has a TDP of 210 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The Vega II Duo has a TDP of 475 W and a suggested PSU of 850 W.

Q: Which card supports newer APIs?

A: The RTX 4500 Ada supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vega II Duo supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Vega II Duo wins?

A: In the database, the Vega II Duo has a Geekbench Metal score of 122,522, but the RTX 4500 Ada has no Metal score recorded, so a direct comparison is not possible. In the shared OpenCL and Vulkan tests, the Vega II Duo loses both.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Vega II Duo?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo had a launch MSRP of 4,399 USD. The RTX 4500 Ada has no launch MSRP listed in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation | AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | GCN 5.1 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 45,900 million | 13,230 million |

| Die Size | 379 mm² | 331 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 121.1M / mm² | 40.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2070 MHz | 1400 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2580 MHz | 1720 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 432.0 GB/s | 1.02 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 7680 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 240 | 256 |

| ROPs | 80 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 60 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 240 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 206.4 GPixel/s | 110.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 619.2 GTexel/s | 440.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 39.63 TFLOPS | 14.09 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 39.63 TFLOPS (1:1) | 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 210 W | 475 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Quad-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 850 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt |

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

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

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

| Release Date | 2023-08-08 | 2019-06-02 |