AMD Radeon Pro Vega II vs NVIDIA CMP 30HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX. Across the two shared benchmark tests, the AMD card wins both, and the margin is substantial in each case.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro Vega II scores 99,048, while the CMP 30HX manages 65,199. That is a 51.9% advantage for the AMD card. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further: the Radeon Pro Vega II posts 99,621, versus 62,484 for the NVIDIA board, a 59.4% lead. Both tests point to the same conclusion: the Radeon Pro Vega II is in a different performance class entirely.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The AMD card averages 109,617 across its recorded benchmarks, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX averages 63,842, which sits in the 89th percentile. A five percentile gap in the overall distribution reflects a very large raw score difference.

Context from nearest rivals reinforces how strong the Radeon Pro Vega II actually is. Its average score of 109,617 is within 1% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900, which averages 110,725. It is 2.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342) and 2.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo (106,750). Only the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile, at 113,944, beats it among its nearest rivals, and only by 3.8%. The CMP 30HX, by comparison, is essentially tied with its nearest rivals: it is within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64,212), 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775), and 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693). The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP matches it exactly at 63,830.

What matters for a buyer is the scale of the difference. A 51.9% OpenCL lead and a 59.4% Vulkan lead are not marginal wins; they represent a full tier of separation. The Radeon Pro Vega II is competing with modern workstation flagships, while the CMP 30HX is trading blows with mid-range and older professional cards.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II averages 109,617, which is 71.7% higher than the NVIDIA CMP 30HX average of 63,842.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro Vega II compare to its closest rival in the database?

A: Its average score of 109,617 is within 1% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725), making it effectively a peer of that flagship workstation card.

Q: Is the CMP 30HX competitive with cards in its own performance neighborhood?

A: Yes, the data shows it is essentially tied with its nearest rivals: it matches the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830, is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7600M, and 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56.

Q: Which benchmark shows the biggest gap between the two cards?

A: Geekbench Vulkan shows the largest delta, with the Radeon Pro Vega II leading by 59.4% (99,621 versus 62,484).

Q: Does the CMP 30HX win in any shared benchmark test?

A: No. In the two tests recorded for both cards, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II wins both.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro Vega II's percentile ranking compare to the CMP 30HX?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega II ranks in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the CMP 30HX ranks in the 89th percentile.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is the faster card by a wide margin, winning both head-to-head tests with deltas of 51.9% and 59.4%. Its average benchmark score of 109,617 places it alongside the AMD Radeon PRO W7900, a modern workstation flagship. Anyone choosing purely on compute performance should select the Radeon Pro Vega II.

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX, with an average score of 63,842, sits in a different performance tier. It is competitive with cards like the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100, but those are not in the same league as the Radeon Pro Vega II. The CMP 30HX is also built for a specific purpose: it is a mining card with no display outputs, so it cannot serve as a standard graphics card. The Radeon Pro Vega II, by contrast, includes 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs.

For compute workloads that use OpenCL or Vulkan, the Radeon Pro Vega II is the clear choice. The CMP 30HX only makes sense in a narrow use case where its lower power draw and compact dual-slot design matter more than raw performance, but the benchmark data offers no scenario where it outperforms the AMD card.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification field.

Memory is one of the largest divides. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II has 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, with 336.0 GB/s. That is a 26 GB capacity difference and more than double the memory bandwidth for the AMD card.

Compute resources also favor AMD heavily. The Radeon Pro Vega II has 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The CMP 30HX has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The AMD card delivers 14.09 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 28.18 TFLOPS of FP16, while the NVIDIA card delivers 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.05 TFLOPS FP16.

Clock speeds show a different story. The CMP 30HX has a higher boost clock at 1785 MHz versus 1720 MHz for the Radeon Pro Vega II, and a memory clock of 1750 MHz versus 806 MHz for the AMD card. The base clocks are closer: 1530 MHz for NVIDIA versus 1574 MHz for AMD. Despite the clock disadvantage, the AMD card wins decisively because of its much larger execution resource pool.

Power and physical specifications differ sharply. The Radeon Pro Vega II has a TDP of 475 W and requires a suggested 850 W power supply, while the CMP 30HX has a TDP of 125 W and a suggested 300 W PSU. The AMD card is quad-slot, whereas the NVIDIA card is dual-slot. The CMP 30HX has a 1x 8-pin power connector and measures 229 mm by 111 mm by 35 mm; the Radeon Pro Vega II has no listed power connector, length, or dimensions in the database.

Process technology also differs. The Radeon Pro Vega II uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the CMP 30HX uses a 12 nm process, also from TSMC. The AMD chip has 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die, versus 6,600 million on a 284 mm² die for NVIDIA. Transistor density is 40.0M per mm² for AMD and 23.2M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is built on GCN 5.1, using the Vega 20 chip, and belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX uses the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, from the Mining GPUs generation.

The bus interfaces are entirely different. The Radeon Pro Vega II uses Apple MPX, a proprietary Apple expansion bus, while the CMP 30HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4. This difference matters: the Apple MPX interface is tied to Apple's Mac Pro ecosystem, and the Radeon Pro Vega II's generation is specifically listed as Radeon Pro Mac. The CMP 30HX, by contrast, is designed for mining rigs and has no display outputs at all.

API support is similar in some areas but not identical. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon Pro Vega II supports Vulkan 1.3, while the CMP 30HX supports Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed in the database.

The release dates are nearly two years apart. The Radeon Pro Vega II launched on 2019-06-02, and the CMP 30HX launched on 2021-02-24. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The AMD card has a launch MSRP of 2,199 USD, and the NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 799 USD.

The manufacturing approach also differs in scale. AMD packs 13,230 million transistors into 331 mm², achieving 40.0M transistors per mm². NVIDIA fits 6,600 million transistors into 284 mm², at 23.2M per mm². The 7 nm process gives AMD a density advantage of roughly 1.7x, which helps explain how it fits nearly double the transistors and far more compute units onto a die that is only about 16.5% larger.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II wins in every category where performance is the deciding factor. It is 51.9% ahead in OpenCL and 59.4% ahead in Vulkan. Its FP32 throughput of 14.09 TFLOPS is roughly 2.8x the CMP 30HX's 5.027 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 825.3 GB/s is more than double the 336.0 GB/s of the NVIDIA card, and its 32 GB capacity is over five times the 6 GB on the CMP 30HX. It also has display outputs, making it usable as a standard graphics card, and it supports Vulkan 1.3.

The NVIDIA CMP 30HX wins in practical deployment scenarios, not raw performance. Its TDP of 125 W is less than a third of the AMD card's 475 W, and its suggested power supply of 300 W is far below the 850 W suggested for the Radeon Pro Vega II. Its dual-slot design is more compact than the quad-slot AMD card, and its physical dimensions are recorded in the database (229 mm by 111 mm by 35 mm), while the AMD card's dimensions are not listed. It also has a higher boost clock at 1785 MHz and supports Vulkan 1.4.

The use-case split is therefore clear. For compute workloads, content creation, or any task that can use OpenCL or Vulkan, the Radeon Pro Vega II is the superior choice by a wide margin. For a mining-oriented deployment where power efficiency, physical footprint, and low system power supply requirements are the priorities, the CMP 30HX is the more practical card, but the benchmark data shows it cannot match the AMD card's raw compute capability. The Radeon Pro Vega II's nearest rivals are workstation flagships like the AMD Radeon PRO W7900; the CMP 30HX's nearest rivals are mid-range cards like the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP. Those are different market segments, and the performance data reflects that separation clearly.