AMD Radeon Pro Vega II vs NVIDIA L40 Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA L40 is the definitive choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its average benchmark score of 284,111 places it in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II sits at 109,617 in the 94th percentile. The L40 leads by 234.1% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 138.2% in Geekbench Vulkan, making it a class-leading accelerator for general compute and graphics APIs.

The Radeon Pro Vega II, despite being end-of-life, remains a niche option for Apple MPX-based systems. Its 32 GB of HBM2 memory and 4096-bit bus deliver 825.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is close to the L40’s 864.0 GB/s. However, its compute throughput is far lower: 14.09 TFLOPS FP32 versus 90.52 TFLOPS on the L40. The Vega II also has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, while the L40 packs 142 RT cores and 568 tensor cores.

For anyone building a server or workstation around PCIe 4.0, the L40 is the only rational pick. The Vega II’s Apple MPX interface restricts it to Mac Pro platforms, and its 475 W TDP with a quad-slot footprint makes it a demanding physical install. The L40, by contrast, uses a dual-slot design with a single 16-pin power connector and a 700 W suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA L40 is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process using the AD102 chip, part of the Ada Lovelace architecture. It packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 125.3 million per mm². The Radeon Pro Vega II uses the Vega 20 chip on TSMC’s 7 nm node, with 13,230 million transistors across 331 mm², for a density of 40.0 million per mm². That is a 3.1x density advantage for the L40, reflecting the newer process and more complex design.

Core counts differ dramatically. The L40 has 18,176 shading units, 568 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The Vega II has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The L40 also adds 142 RT cores and 568 tensor cores, which the Vega II lacks entirely. Memory configurations diverge: the L40 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, while the Vega II uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus. The L40’s memory runs at 18 Gbps effective, delivering 864.0 GB/s; the Vega II’s 1612 Mbps effective memory yields 825.3 GB/s.

Clock speeds tell another story. The L40 has a base clock of 735 MHz and a boost of 2490 MHz. The Vega II starts at 1574 MHz and boosts to 1720 MHz. Despite lower clocks, the L40’s massive core count produces a pixel rate of 478.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 1,414.3 GTexel/s, versus 110.1 GPixel/s and 440.3 GTexel/s for the Vega II. FP32 throughput is 90.52 TFLOPS for the L40, while the Vega II manages 14.09 TFLOPS. In FP16, the L40 sustains 90.52 TFLOPS (1:1), while the Vega II reaches 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1).

API support also differs. The L40 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vega II supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The L40’s newer feature set aligns with modern rendering pipelines. The Vega II uses an Apple MPX bus interface, whereas the L40 uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA L40 wins in every recorded benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 330,926 versus 99,048 for the Vega II, a 234.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the L40 scores 237,295 versus 99,621, a 138.2% lead. The L40 also holds a higher average score of 284,111, compared to 109,617 for the Vega II.

The Vega II’s only qualitative advantages are its HBM2 memory (which offers 825.3 GB/s bandwidth, close to the L40’s 864.0 GB/s) and its 32 GB capacity. However, the L40 has 48 GB, so capacity favors NVIDIA. The Vega II’s 4096-bit bus is wider, but that does not translate into higher bandwidth. The Vega II also has a higher base clock (1574 MHz versus 735 MHz), but boost clocks are lower (1720 MHz versus 2490 MHz).

For ray tracing workloads, the L40 is the only option with dedicated RT cores. For AI and tensor operations, the L40’s 568 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration that the Vega II cannot offer. The Vega II’s FP16 advantage is relative to its own FP32, not to the L40; the L40’s FP16 is 3.2x higher in absolute terms. The Vega II’s 475 W TDP is higher than the L40’s 300 W, and the suggested PSU is 850 W versus 700 W, so the L40 is also more power-efficient per unit of compute.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA L40. It delivers 90.52 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II delivers 14.09 TFLOPS FP32. In Geekbench OpenCL, the L40 scores 330,926 versus 99,048.

Q: Can the Radeon Pro Vega II handle ray tracing?

A: No. The Vega II has no RT cores listed in the database. The NVIDIA L40 has 142 RT cores, which enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA L40 has 48 GB of GDDR6. The Radeon Pro Vega II has 32 GB of HBM2. The L40 also has higher bandwidth at 864.0 GB/s versus 825.3 GB/s.

Q: What is the performance gap in Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA L40 scores 237,295 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 138.2% higher than the Vega II’s 99,621.

Q: Which GPU is better for AI workloads?

A: The NVIDIA L40, because it includes 568 tensor cores. The Vega II has no tensor cores in its specification.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: Both are end-of-life. The L40 was released on 2022-10-12, and the Vega II on 2019-06-02.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the NVIDIA L40 and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II. The NVIDIA L40 wins both, giving it 2 wins and 0 losses.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the L40 scores 330,926. The Vega II scores 99,048. That is a delta of 234.1% in favor of the L40. This result aligns with the raw FP32 specifications: 90.52 TFLOPS versus 14.09 TFLOPS. The L40’s 18,176 shading units and 568 TMUs provide far more parallel throughput. The Vega II’s 4,096 shading units and 256 TMUs cannot close the gap, even with its higher base clock of 1574 MHz.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the L40 scores 237,295. The Vega II scores 99,621. The L40 leads by 138.2%. Vulkan workloads often stress memory bandwidth and command processing. The L40’s 864.0 GB/s bandwidth edges out the Vega II’s 825.3 GB/s, but the larger difference comes from compute capacity. The L40’s 192 ROPs and 1,414.3 GTexel/s texture rate dwarf the Vega II’s 64 ROPs and 440.3 GTexel/s.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The L40 averages 284,111, while the Vega II averages 109,617. That places the L40 in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 94th percentile for the Vega II. The L40’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation (287,237, 1.1% higher), the NVIDIA L40S (295,763, 3.9% higher), the NVIDIA L20 (251,147, 13.1% lower), and the AMD Instinct MI300X (317,994, 10.7% higher). The Vega II’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 (110,725, 1% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342, 2.1% lower), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo (106,750, 2.7% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944, 3.8% higher).

In practical terms, the L40 is more than 2.5x faster in OpenCL and more than 2.3x faster in Vulkan than the Vega II. The Vega II’s 32 GB HBM2 memory and 4096-bit bus are its only spec-sheet highlights, but they do not overcome the L40’s architectural advantages. The L40’s 48 GB GDDR6 and 384-bit bus deliver higher bandwidth and more capacity. The L40 also supports newer APIs, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega II caps at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

The physical design differs as well. The L40 is dual-slot with a 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and a single 16-pin power connector. The Vega II is quad-slot with an Apple MPX interface, no listed power connector, and a 475 W TDP. The L40’s 300 W TDP and 700 W suggested PSU make it easier to integrate into standard server chassis. The Vega II’s 850 W suggested PSU and quad-slot footprint limit it to large Mac Pro enclosures.

For users with PCIe 4.0 x16 slots, the L40 is the clear winner. For Mac-specific deployments, the Vega II remains a functional choice, but its compute performance is a fraction of the L40’s. The data shows no scenario where the Vega II outperforms the L40 in benchmark scores. The L40 is end-of-life, but it still outperforms a GPU released three years earlier by a wide margin.