AMD Radeon Pro Vega II vs NVIDIA H200 NVL Comparison

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA H200 NVL than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334,891 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II scores 99,048. That is a 238.1% advantage for the NVIDIA part, meaning it delivers more than three times the raw compute throughput in this test.

Q: Where does the NVIDIA H200 NVL sit relative to other server GPUs?

A: The database places the H200 NVL at the 100th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 334,891 is 3.1% behind the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), 5.3% ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994), and 13.2% ahead of the NVIDIA L40S (295,763).

Q: What benchmark scores does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II achieve?

A: The Vega II records three scores in the database: 130,183 in Geekbench Metal, 99,048 in OpenCL, and 99,621 in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 109,617, placing it at the 94th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does the Vega II compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Vega II is 1% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725), 2.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342), 2.7% ahead of the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo (106,750), and 3.8% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944).

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL has 141 GB of HBM3e memory on a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II has 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 825.3 GB/s.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. The NVIDIA H200 NVL is listed as Active, released on November 17, 2024. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is End-of-life, released on June 2, 2019.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different design eras. The NVIDIA H200 NVL is built on the Hopper architecture with the GH100 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II uses the older GCN 5.1 architecture with the Vega 20 chip, fabricated on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC. The node difference alone explains a substantial portion of the performance gap: the H200 NVL packs 80,000 million transistors onto an 814 mm² die, for a transistor density of 98.3 million per mm². The Vega II has 13,230 million transistors on a 331 mm² die, yielding 40.0 million per mm².

The compute layouts diverge sharply. The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, plus 528 tensor cores dedicated to AI workloads. The Vega II has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no tensor cores at all. This explains why the H200 NVL achieves 60.32 TFLOPS of FP32 and 120.6 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the Vega II manages 14.09 TFLOPS of FP32 and 28.18 TFLOPS of FP16 (also 2:1). The H200 NVL is roughly 4.3x stronger in FP32 and FP16 compute, which aligns with its 4x larger shading unit count.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The H200 NVL uses HBM3e with a 6144-bit bus and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth, while the Vega II uses HBM2 with a 4096-bit bus and 825.3 GB/s. The H200 NVL carries 141 GB of memory versus 32 GB on the Vega II, a 4.4x capacity advantage. The bandwidth gap is even larger at 5.9x in favor of NVIDIA.

Feature support tells a story of different target platforms. The H200 NVL has no display outputs and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support, it is a pure compute accelerator. The Vega II offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt outputs, with DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 support. The Vega II also uses the Apple MPX bus interface, while the H200 NVL uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Clock speeds are close: the H200 NVL runs at 1365 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost, the Vega II at 1574 MHz base and 1720 MHz boost. The Vega II actually has a higher base clock, but its older architecture and far fewer execution units cannot compensate.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one shared benchmark exists in the database: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA H200 NVL scores 334,891 against the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II's 99,048, a delta of 238.1% in favor of NVIDIA. This is not a narrow victory; it is a decisive generational and architectural gap. In percentage terms, the H200 NVL's score is more than 3.3 times the Vega II's.

Context from the nearest rivals sharpens the picture. The H200 NVL's 334,891 is within 3.1% of the NVIDIA B200 (345,482), which is a newer Blackwell part. It also sits 5.3% above the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994) and 13.2% above the NVIDIA L40S (295,763). These are all modern, high-end server accelerators, and the H200 NVL is competitive with all of them. The Vega II, by contrast, sits at 94th percentile overall, with its best score (130,183 in Metal) still less than half of the H200 NVL's OpenCL result.

The Vega II does have one bright spot: its Metal score of 130,183 is 31.4% higher than its OpenCL score of 99,048. This suggests Apple's Metal API extracts more from the GCN 5.1 architecture than OpenCL does. However, even that best-case score is 61.1% below the H200 NVL's OpenCL result. The Vulkan score of 99,621 is nearly identical to OpenCL, indicating the Vega II's performance is consistently in the 99,000 to 100,000 range regardless of API, with Metal being the sole exception.

The H200 NVL records only one benchmark entry, but its 100th percentile ranking means it outperforms every other GPU in the database on average score. The Vega II's 94th percentile places it in the upper tier of all GPUs, but far from the top. The average benchmark scores tell the same story: 334,891 for the H200 NVL versus 109,617 for the Vega II, a 205.6% difference.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA H200 NVL | AMD Radeon Pro Vega II |

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

| Architecture | Hopper | GCN 5.1 |

| Process node | 5 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 80,000 million | 13,230 million |

| Die size | 814 mm² | 331 mm² |

| Transistor density | 98.3M / mm² | 40.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1365 MHz | 1574 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1785 MHz | 1720 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) | 806 MHz (1612 Mbps effective) |

| Memory size | 141 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory type | HBM3e | HBM2 |

| Memory bus | 6144 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 4.89 TB/s | 825.3 GB/s |

| Shading units | 16,896 | 4,096 |

| TMUs | 528 | 256 |

| ROPs | 24 | 64 |

| Tensor cores | 528 | None |

| Pixel rate | 42.84 GPixel/s | 110.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 942.5 GTexel/s | 440.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 60.32 TFLOPS | 14.09 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 120.6 TFLOPS (2:1) | 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 600 W | 475 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | Quad-slot |

| Suggested PSU | 1000 W | 850 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

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

| DirectX | N/A | 12 (12_1) |

| OpenGL | N/A | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | Not specified |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | Not specified |

| Production status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release date | 2024-11-17 | 2019-06-02 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | 2,199 USD |

The specification table reveals several counterintuitive results. The Vega II has a higher base clock (1574 MHz vs 1365 MHz) and more than double the ROPs (64 vs 24), which explains its higher pixel rate of 110.1 GPixel/s versus 42.84 GPixel/s. The Vega II also draws less power (475 W vs 600 W) and has a lower suggested PSU (850 W vs 1000 W). But in every throughput metric that matters for compute workloads, the H200 NVL dominates. The Vega II's ROP advantage is irrelevant for a card with no display outputs on the NVIDIA side, and the H200 NVL's texture rate of 942.5 GTexel/s is 2.1x the Vega II's 440.3 GTexel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA H200 NVL wins in every compute benchmark recorded in the database. Its OpenCL score of 334,891 is 238.1% higher than the Vega II's 99,048. It also wins on FP32 throughput (60.32 vs 14.09 TFLOPS), FP16 throughput (120.6 vs 28.18 TFLOPS), memory bandwidth (4.89 TB/s vs 825.3 GB/s), memory capacity (141 GB vs 32 GB), and texture rate (942.5 vs 440.3 GTexel/s). For workloads that depend on raw floating-point compute, large model memory footprints, or high-bandwidth data movement, the H200 NVL is the clear choice. Its 528 tensor cores further extend its lead in AI inference and training tasks, where the Vega II has no equivalent hardware.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II wins in a few narrow categories. It has a higher pixel rate (110.1 vs 42.84 GPixel/s), more ROPs (64 vs 24), a higher base clock (1574 vs 1365 MHz), lower power draw (475 W vs 600 W), and lower suggested PSU requirements (850 W vs 1000 W). It is also the only one of the two with display outputs, supporting 1x HDMI 2.0b and 4x Thunderbolt, along with full DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 support. This makes it suitable for visualization, rendering, or any workload that requires a display connection. The Vega II's Metal score of 130,183 suggests it remains functional in Apple ecosystems, and its 94th percentile ranking is respectable for a 2019 part.

The H200 NVL, by contrast, has no display outputs and no graphics API support. It is a server compute accelerator, not a workstation graphics card. The Vega II's nearest rivals include other AMD pro cards like the Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725, 1% ahead) and the Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342, 2.1% behind), which places it in a cluster of similarly performing workstation GPUs. The H200 NVL's rivals are all flagship server accelerators, and it holds its own among them.

The Verdict

The data presents a stark generational contrast. The NVIDIA H200 NVL is a modern Hopper server accelerator targeting AI and high-performance compute, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II is an end-of-life workstation GPU from 2019 designed for Apple Mac Pro systems. In the only shared benchmark, OpenCL, the H200 NVL is 238.1% faster. Its 100th percentile ranking versus the Vega II's 94th percentile underscores the gap.

Anyone building a server for large-scale compute, AI training, or inference should choose the NVIDIA H200 NVL. Its 141 GB of HBM3e memory, 4.89 TB/s bandwidth, and 60.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance place it among the fastest accelerators in the database. The fact that it trails the NVIDIA B200 by only 3.1% while leading the AMD Instinct MI300X by 5.3% confirms it is a top-tier part even among its contemporaries. The lack of display outputs and graphics APIs is irrelevant in a headless server environment.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II remains relevant only for specific legacy or Mac-centric workflows. Its Metal score of 130,183 shows the architecture still performs reasonably under Apple's API, and its display outputs and graphics API support make it functional for visualization tasks. But its 32 GB memory, 825.3 GB/s bandwidth, and 14.09 TFLOPS FP32 are all severely outdated by 2024 standards. The 2,199 USD launch MSRP reflects its 2019 positioning, not current value. For any new deployment, the H200 NVL is the only rational choice based on the recorded data. The Vega II's wins are limited to pixel rate, power efficiency, and API compatibility, none of which compensate for a 3.3x compute deficit.