AMD Radeon Pro Vega II vs NVIDIA A10M Comparison

The NVIDIA A10M and AMD Radeon Pro Vega II represent two distinct approaches to professional graphics, separated by architecture, memory philosophy, and intended platform. The data available for direct comparison is limited to a single shared benchmark, but that result, combined with the broader performance context, tells a clear story about generational capability versus raw memory capacity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head data point is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is decisively in favor of the NVIDIA A10M. The A10M scores 135230 points, while the Radeon Pro Vega II manages 99048 points. This translates to a 36.5% performance advantage for the NVIDIA card. This is a substantial gap, not a marginal one; it indicates a fundamental difference in compute efficiency and raw throughput for general-purpose GPU workloads.

The significance of this win becomes clearer when examining the percentile rankings. The A10M sits in the 96th percentile of all GPUs, while the Vega II is in the 94th percentile. While both are high-performing parts, the A10M is operating in a higher tier of overall performance. The A10M's average benchmark score is 135230, which is identical to its OpenCL score, suggesting this single result is representative of its overall standing. The Vega II’s average score is 109617, which is a blend of its OpenCL, Metal, and Vulkan results. Its OpenCL score of 99048 is its lowest among the three recorded benchmarks, indicating that its architecture may be more optimized for other API environments.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional context. The A10M's closest competitor, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation, scores 135218 with a delta of 0%, meaning they are statistically tied. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 is just behind with 135396 points, a negligible -0.1% difference. This places the A10M in a very competitive performance band. On the other side, the Vega II’s nearest rivals are all at a similar level. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 110725 (a -1% delta from the Vega II), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113944 (a -3.8% delta). The Vega II is clearly not in the same performance class as the A10M, as evidenced by the massive 36.5% delta in their direct comparison.

The performance narrative is therefore one of clear superiority for the A10M in OpenCL. The data does not support a single benchmark win for the AMD card in any shared test.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process technologies. The NVIDIA A10M is based on the GA102 chip using the Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It is a massive chip, containing 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is built on the Vega 20 chip with the older GCN 5.1 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a more advanced 7 nm process. It is a much smaller chip, with 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die. Interestingly, despite the process node advantage, the transistor density is slightly higher on the A10M (45.1M / mm² vs 40.0M / mm²), showing a more efficient packing of logic.

The compute core configurations diverge significantly. The A10M features 7168 shading units, 224 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 80 render output units (ROPs). It also carries 56 dedicated ray tracing cores and 224 tensor cores, which are absent entirely from the Vega II. The Vega II has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the Vega II has more TMUs, which can influence texture-heavy workloads. The A10M compensates with higher clock speeds, boosting to 1635 MHz compared to the Vega II's 1720 MHz base and boost of 1720 MHz. The A10M's higher core count and boost clock result in a much higher FP32 throughput of 23.44 TFLOPS versus the Vega II's 14.09 TFLOPS. For FP16, the A10M matches its FP32 rate at 23.44 TFLOPS (1:1), while the Vega II's rate is 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1), giving it a theoretical advantage in half-precision work.

Memory is another major differentiator. The A10M uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 500.2 GB/s. The Vega II uses 32 GB of HBM2 on an enormous 4096-bit bus, delivering 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This gives the AMD card a significant advantage in raw memory capacity and bandwidth, which is critical for large datasets that exceed the A10M's capacity. The output capabilities also differ: the A10M has no display outputs, designed as a compute or server accelerator, while the Vega II provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs, making it a workstation card for direct display connection.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear winner for raw compute performance. The NVIDIA A10M is 36.5% ahead of the Radeon Pro Vega II in the only shared test, Geekbench OpenCL. This is a dominant margin that cannot be overlooked. Its higher shading unit count, tensor cores, ray tracing cores, and superior FP32 performance make it the more capable compute engine. For any workload that relies on raw shader throughput or the specific Ampere features, the A10M is the superior choice based on the numbers.

However, the verdict is not absolute. The Radeon Pro Vega II offers 32 GB of memory, which is 60% more than the A10M's 20 GB. Combined with a 825.3 GB/s memory bandwidth, the Vega II is better suited for holding extremely large datasets in memory. The data shows its Vulkan score (99621) is close to its OpenCL score, and its Metal score (130183) is its strongest, indicating it is a capable general-purpose card in its own right, especially within the Apple ecosystem given its Apple MPX bus interface. The A10M, being an end-of-life server product with no display outputs, is not designed for interactive desktop use.

Ultimately, the choice depends on the specific requirement. If the priority is maximum compute throughput and the workload fits within 20 GB, the A10M is the clear winner. If the workload requires massive memory capacity for large simulations or renders, and the platform supports the Vega II, its 32 GB pool is a decisive advantage that no amount of compute speed can compensate for.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA A10M | AMD Radeon Pro Vega II |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Chip | GA102 | Vega 20 |

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 5.1 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 13,230 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 331 mm² |

| Base Clock | 975 MHz | 1574 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1635 MHz | 1720 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) | 806 MHz (1612 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 20 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus | 320 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 500.2 GB/s | 825.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 7168 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 224 | 256 |

| ROPs | 80 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 56 | N/A |

| Tensor Cores | 224 | N/A |

| Pixel Rate | 130.8 GPixel/s | 110.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 366.2 GTexel/s | 440.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 23.44 TFLOPS | 14.09 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 23.44 TFLOPS (1:1) | 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 475 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Quad-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 850 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt |

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

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | N/A | 2019-06-02 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 2,199 USD |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA A10M is faster. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scored 135230 compared to the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II's 99048, a 36.5% advantage.

Q: What is the main advantage of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II?

A: Its memory subsystem. It has 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, providing 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This is significantly more capacity and bandwidth than the A10M's 20 GB GDDR6 configuration.

Q: Does the NVIDIA A10M support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The A10M is built on the Ampere architecture and includes 56 dedicated ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II, based on GCN 5.1, does not have any dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: Can the NVIDIA A10M be used for display output?

A: No. The A10M has no display outputs and is designed as a server or compute accelerator. The Radeon Pro Vega II, in contrast, includes 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs.

Q: What is the performance percentile of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA A10M is in the 96th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is in the 94th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA A10M, with a rating of 23.44 TFLOPS compared to the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II's 14.09 TFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA A10M wins in scenarios demanding raw computational power. Its 36.5% lead in OpenCL performance makes it the clear choice for general-purpose GPU compute tasks that are not limited by memory capacity. The presence of 224 tensor cores and 56 ray tracing cores means it is also better suited for AI inference, machine learning workloads, and any future renderer that leverages hardware-accelerated ray tracing. Its single-slot design and 150 W TDP are also far more manageable in a server environment than the Vega II's quad-slot, 475 W requirement.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II wins in memory-bound scenarios. The 32 GB frame buffer is its key asset, allowing it to hold larger models, bigger textures, or more complex scenes than the A10M. The 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth is 65% higher than the A10M's, which is critical for tasks that stream large amounts of data. Its display outputs and Apple MPX interface make it the only viable option for users needing a direct-attached workstation GPU within Apple's ecosystem. While its FP32 performance is lower, its FP16 throughput of 28.18 TFLOPS is higher than the A10M's, giving it an edge in specific half-precision workloads. The choice is between the A10M's compute dominance and the Vega II's memory capacity and platform integration.