AMD Radeon RX 480 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Comparison

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 and AMD Radeon RX 480 are both end-of-life AMD graphics cards built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, but they target different performance tiers. The RX Vega 56 is the clear performance leader in every benchmark where both were tested, holding a substantial edge in raw compute and rasterization. The RX 480, meanwhile, is the more modest card, with lower power requirements and a smaller physical footprint, making it a sensible pick for older or smaller builds where extreme performance is not the priority. Based strictly on the data, the RX Vega 56 is the card to choose for maximum frame rates, while the RX 480 is the choice for those prioritizing lower system draw and easier installation.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and it wins them by a wide margin. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the Vega 56 scores 1501 against the RX 480’s 966, a delta of 55.4%. In Geekbench Metal, the Vega 56 scores 73512 versus 51057, a 44% advantage. If your only criterion is raw performance, the RX Vega 56 is the definitive pick.

However, the RX 480 is not without its place. Its 150 W TDP is significantly lower than the Vega 56’s 210 W, and it requires only a single 6-pin power connector versus the Vega 56’s two 8-pin connectors. The RX 480 is also shorter (240 mm vs 280 mm) and narrower (95 mm vs 111 mm), making it far easier to fit into compact cases. For a builder with a 450 W power supply and a small chassis, the RX 480 is the practical choice, provided they accept a large performance deficit.

The average benchmark scores tell the same story. The Vega 56’s average score is 37507, placing it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs. The RX 480 averages 33997, sitting in the 78th percentile. That 3-percentile gap is modest, but the per-test deltas show why the Vega 56 is in a higher class: it is not just slightly faster, it is decisively faster in the workloads tested. For those who want the best possible performance from this generation, the RX Vega 56 is the only option. For those who need a smaller, less power-hungry card, the RX 480 is a capable fallback.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in DirectX 12 workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is faster. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 1501 versus the RX 480’s 966, a 55.4% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench Metal?

A: The RX Vega 56 wins again, scoring 73512 against the RX 480’s 51057. That is a 44% higher score for the Vega 56.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The RX 480 has a lower TDP of 150 W, compared to the RX Vega 56’s 210 W. The RX 480 also uses a single 6-pin power connector, while the Vega 56 requires two 8-pin connectors.

Q: Are these cards the same physical size?

A: No. The RX Vega 56 is 280 mm long, 111 mm high, and 40 mm wide. The RX 480 is smaller at 240 mm long, 95 mm high, and 35 mm wide.

Q: Do both cards support the same API level for DirectX?

A: No. The RX Vega 56 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 480 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX Vega 56 has an average benchmark score of 37507, which is higher than the RX 480’s 33997. The Vega 56 also sits in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, versus the RX 480’s 78th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are based on different generations of AMD’s Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The RX Vega 56 uses GCN 5.0, while the RX 480 uses GCN 4.0. This generational jump brings substantial changes to the compute core. The Vega 56’s chip, Vega 10, packs 12,500 million transistors onto a 495 mm² die. The RX 480’s Ellesmere chip is much smaller, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. Despite the size difference, transistor density is similar: 25.3M per mm² for the Vega 56 and 24.6M per mm² for the RX 480.

The memory subsystem is a major architectural divergence. The Vega 56 uses HBM2 memory with a 2048-bit bus, delivering 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 480 uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 256.0 GB/s. That is a 60% bandwidth advantage for the Vega 56, which directly impacts performance in bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Compute resources are also scaled up on the Vega 56. It has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 480 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Vega 56’s FP32 throughput is 10.54 TFLOPS versus 5.834 TFLOPS for the RX 480. Notably, the Vega 56 has an FP16 rate of 21.09 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RX 480’s FP16 rate is identical to its FP32 at 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores, as those are null fields in the data.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows clear separation between the two cards in nearly every category. Clock speeds differ: the Vega 56 has a base clock of 1156 MHz and a boost of 1471 MHz, while the RX 480 runs at 1120 MHz base and 1266 MHz boost. The memory clocks are also different, with the Vega 56’s HBM2 running at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) and the RX 480’s GDDR5 at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective).

Pixel and texture rates favor the Vega 56 heavily. It achieves 94.14 GPixel/s and 329.5 GTexel/s, versus 40.51 GPixel/s and 182.3 GTexel/s for the RX 480. The Vega 56’s TDP is 210 W, and it requires a 550 W suggested PSU, while the RX 480’s TDP is 150 W with a 450 W suggested PSU. The Vega 56 is dual-slot with two 8-pin connectors; the RX 480 is also dual-slot but uses a single 6-pin connector. Both cards use PCIe 3.0 x16 and have identical display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Dimensions differ, as noted: the Vega 56 is larger in all three axes. The Vega 56’s launch MSRP was 399 USD, while the RX 480 launched at 229 USD. Both cards are end-of-life, with the Vega 56 released on 2017-08-13 and the RX 480 on 2016-06-28. The Vega 56’s predecessor is Polaris, and its successor is Navi. The RX 480’s predecessor is Pirate Islands, and its successor is Polaris.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two tests, and the RX Vega 56 wins both outright. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, the Vega 56 scores 1501 points. The RX 480 manages 966 points. The delta is 55.4%, meaning the Vega 56 is more than half again as fast as the RX 480 in this DirectX 12 test. This is the larger of the two wins for the Vega 56.

The second test, Geekbench Metal, shows a similar pattern. The Vega 56 scores 73512, while the RX 480 scores 51057. The delta is 44%, a slightly smaller but still massive gap. Metal is Apple’s graphics API, so this result is particularly relevant for users running macOS or other Metal-compatible environments. The data shows that the Vega 56’s architectural advantages—more shading units, higher clocks, and vastly more memory bandwidth—translate directly into benchmark wins.

It is notably the RX 480 has two additional benchmark entries in its own data: Geekbench OpenCL (37998) and Geekbench Vulkan (45968). However, these are not head-to-head comparisons, as the Vega 56 lacks corresponding scores in the pack. The wins for the Vega 56 stand at 2, with 0 wins for the RX 480 in direct comparison.

Where Each One Wins

The RX Vega 56 wins in every performance category where data exists. Its 55.4% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 makes it the clear choice for modern DirectX 12 gaming workloads. Its 44% lead in Geekbench Metal makes it the better option for Metal-accelerated applications. The Vega 56’s higher FP32 throughput (10.54 TFLOPS vs 5.834 TFLOPS) and larger memory bandwidth (409.6 GB/s vs 256.0 GB/s) support these results. If you need raw graphics performance, the Vega 56 is the undisputed winner.

The RX 480 wins in practical, non-performance categories. Its 150 W TDP is 60 W lower than the Vega 56’s 210 W, which means less heat output and lower demands on the rest of the system. Its single 6-pin power connector is far easier to accommodate than the Vega 56’s two 8-pin connectors. The RX 480’s smaller dimensions (240 mm length, 95 mm height, 35 mm width) make it a better fit for small form factor cases. Its 450 W suggested PSU is more modest than the Vega 56’s 550 W requirement, making it viable in older or lower-wattage systems.

In terms of relative standing, the Vega 56 sits at the 81st percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (delta -0.4%) and the NVIDIA RTX 4080 Mobile (delta -1.6%). The RX 480 sits at the 78th percentile, with nearest rivals including the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (delta -0.4%) and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (delta -0.5%). The Vega 56 is closer to much newer, higher-end cards in the database, while the RX 480 competes with more modest offerings. For a builder prioritizing performance, the Vega 56 is the obvious pick. For one prioritizing low power and small size, the RX 480 holds the edge.