AMD Radeon Pro Vega II vs NVIDIA B200 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two accelerators into entirely different performance strata. The NVIDIA B200 dominates in raw compute throughput, winning the only shared test (Geekbench OpenCL) by a staggering 248.8%. In that test, the B200 scores 345,482 points, placing it in the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II, by contrast, scores 99,048 points in the same OpenCL test, which places it at the 94th percentile overall. That percentile gap, from 94 to 100, represents a chasm in compute capability, not a minor difference.

However, the AMD card wins in the practical sense of platform compatibility within its niche. The Radeon Pro Vega II is an Apple MPX form factor with display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt), making it a functional workstation GPU for Mac systems. The B200 is a server module with no display outputs, designed exclusively for datacenter acceleration. If the workload requires driving monitors, the AMD card is the only viable choice. If the workload is pure compute, the NVIDIA part is in a completely different league.

The B200 also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth: 90 GB of HBM3e with a 4096-bit bus delivers 4.10 TB/s, versus the Vega II's 32 GB of HBM2 on the same 4096-bit bus, which yields 825.3 GB/s. That is over four times the memory bandwidth and nearly three times the capacity. For large models or datasets, the B200 avoids spills to system memory, while the Vega II would hit its ceiling quickly.

Power envelopes differ as well. The B200 draws a 1000 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 1400 W, while the Radeon Pro Vega II draws 475 W with a suggested 850 W PSU. The B200 demands far more from the power delivery system, but that power drives substantially more compute.

Architecture Differences

The B200 uses the GB100 chip on the Blackwell architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 104,000 million transistors. The Vega II uses the Vega 20 chip on GCN 5.1, built on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC, with 13,230 million transistors. The B200 has nearly eight times the transistor count. The Vega II has a known die size of 331 mm² and a transistor density of 40.0M per mm²; the B200's die size is not recorded in the database.

Clock behavior is inverted. The B200 runs a low base clock of 700 MHz but boosts to 1965 MHz, suggesting a power-limited design that ramps under load. The Vega II runs at a higher base of 1574 MHz and boosts to 1720 MHz, a narrower range. Memory clocks also differ: the B200 uses 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective transfer rate, while the Vega II uses 806 MHz with 1612 Mbps effective.

Compute resources favor the B200 heavily. The B200 has 18,944 shading units, 592 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The Vega II has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The B200 has no listed RT cores but does have 592 tensor cores. The Vega II has no tensor cores nor RT cores. Pixel rate goes the opposite way: the Vega II outputs 110.1 GPixel/s versus the B200's 47.16 GPixel/s, because the ROP count is higher on the AMD card. Texture rate is higher on the B200 (1,163.3 GTexel/s) versus the Vega II (440.3 GTexel/s).

The architecture generations are far apart. The B200 is part of the Server Blackwell generation, succeeding Server Hopper and preceding Server Rubin. The Vega II belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation, with no predecessor or successor listed. The B200 is still in active production, while the Vega II is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one shared benchmark between the two: Geekbench OpenCL. The B200 scores 345,482, while the Vega II scores 99,048. That gives the B200 a 248.8% lead. This is not a marginal gap; the B200 is roughly three and a half times faster in this workload. For context, the B200's nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA H200 NVL, which scores 334,891, putting the B200 3.2% ahead. The next rival, the B300 SXM6 AC, scores 369,831, putting the B200 6.6% behind that newer part. The B200 is also 8.6% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994) and 16.8% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763).

The Vega II is not in the same league on this test. Its nearest rivals are all much closer in score: the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 scores 110,725 (1% higher than the Vega II), the Radeon Pro W6600X scores 107,342 (2.1% lower), the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo scores 106,750 (2.7% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113,944 (3.8% higher). The Vega II sits in a dense cluster of mid-range workstation parts, while the B200 sits at the absolute top of the entire GPU database.

The B200 also holds a 100th percentile rank among all GPUs, meaning no other card in the database scores higher in the aggregate. The Vega II's 94th percentile is respectable but not elite. In real terms, the B200 is a server accelerator designed for massive parallel workloads, and the Vega II is a more modest workstation card that has since been discontinued.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA B200 is significantly faster, scoring 345,482 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 99,048 for the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II, a 248.8% difference.

Q: Can the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II output video to displays?

A: Yes, it has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs. The NVIDIA B200 has no display outputs, so it is not suited for direct monitor connection.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The B200 has 90 GB of HBM3e on a 4096-bit bus with 4.10 TB/s bandwidth. The Vega II has 32 GB of HBM2 on the same bus width but only 825.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in power consumption?

A: No, the B200 has a 1000 W TDP and requires a 1400 W PSU, while the Vega II has a 475 W TDP and a suggested 850 W PSU. The B200 is far more power-hungry.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA B200 is listed as active in production, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is end-of-life and was released on June 2, 2019.

Q: How does the B200 compare to its closest rival, the NVIDIA H200 NVL?

A: The B200 scores 345,482 versus the H200 NVL's 334,891, a 3.2% advantage for the B200.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field:

• Chip: NVIDIA GB100 (Blackwell) versus AMD Vega 20 (GCN 5.1)
• Process node: 5 nm versus 7 nm, both TSMC
• Transistors: 104,000 million versus 13,230 million
• Die size: Not listed for B200 versus 331 mm² for Vega II
• Transistor density: Not listed for B200 versus 40.0M / mm²
• Base clock: 700 MHz versus 1574 MHz
• Boost clock: 1965 MHz versus 1720 MHz
• Memory clock: 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 806 MHz (1612 Mbps effective)
• Memory size: 90 GB versus 32 GB
• Memory type: HBM3e versus HBM2
• Memory bandwidth: 4.10 TB/s versus 825.3 GB/s
• Shading units: 18,944 versus 4,096
• TMUs: 592 versus 256
• ROPs: 24 versus 64
• Tensor cores: 592 versus none
• Pixel rate: 47.16 GPixel/s versus 110.1 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 1,163.3 GTexel/s versus 440.3 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 74.45 TFLOPS versus 14.09 TFLOPS
• FP16 performance: 1,191.2 TFLOPS (16:1) versus 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 1000 W versus 475 W
• Slot width: SXM Module versus Quad-slot
• Suggested PSU: 1400 W versus 850 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus Apple MPX
• Display outputs: No outputs versus 1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x Thunderbolt
• API support: B200 has no listed APIs versus Vega II with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.3
• Production status: Active versus End-of-life
• Release date: Not listed versus 2019-06-02
• Predecessor: Server Hopper versus none
• Successor: Server Rubin versus none
• Launch MSRP: None listed versus 2,199 USD for the Vega II

The B200 is a server-only compute monster, while the Vega II is a Mac workstation card with display support. The specification list confirms the performance gap: the B200 has 4.6 times the FP32 throughput, 4.6 times the shading units, and over 5 times the memory bandwidth. The Vega II fights back with a higher pixel rate and lower power draw, but those advantages are irrelevant for the compute workloads where the B200 excels.