AMD Radeon RX 480 vs NVIDIA RTX A5000 Comparison

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A5000 is the decisively stronger GPU, outperforming the AMD Radeon RX 480 in every single head-to-head benchmark listed. For users seeking maximum compute, rendering, or high-end workstation performance, the RTX A5000 is the only logical choice. Conversely, the RX 480 is a legacy part; its only merit in this comparison is that it exists as a far less demanding and far older piece of hardware. There is no benchmark result where the RX 480 wins, so the verdict for any performance-driven task is singular.

The Verdict

The NVIDIA RTX A5000 is the clear winner for anyone needing professional-grade performance. The data shows it holds a massive performance lead, delivering roughly four times the score of the RX 480 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test and over four times the score in Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX A5000 is the pick for 3D rendering, compute workloads, and any application that can leverage its 24 GB of memory and dedicated RT and Tensor cores. The AMD Radeon RX 480, while a competent card in its own era, is thoroughly outclassed here. Its only advantage is its much lower power draw, but that is irrelevant when comparing raw capability. The RTX A5000 is for professionals; the RX 480 is a product of its time.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by a generation and a fundamental change in design philosophy. The RX 480 is built on AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It features 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 24.6M per mm². Its configuration includes 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It does not have dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores.

In contrast, the RTX A5000 is based on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This is a much larger and more complex chip, with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, achieving a density of 45.1M per mm². The RTX A5000 features 8192 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, and it introduces 64 dedicated RT cores and 256 tensor cores. This architectural leap is the primary reason for its overwhelming performance advantage. The RTX A5000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 480 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results paint a picture of total dominance for the RTX A5000. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX A5000 scores 3783, while the RX 480 scores a mere 966, a delta of -74.5% for the RX 480. This indicates the RTX A5000 is nearly four times faster in this modern DirectX 12 workload, proof of its superior architecture and shading power.

The compute results are similarly lopsided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A5000 scores 157905, dwarfing the RX 480’s 37998, a delta of -75.9%. This massive gap highlights the RTX A5000’s strength in general-purpose compute tasks, which is a critical feature for workstation use. The Geekbench Vulkan test shows the same trend, with the RTX A5000 achieving 137828 points against the RX 480’s 45968, a delta of -66.6%. While the margin is slightly smaller, it still represents a performance advantage of over 2.5 times for the NVIDIA card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more VRAM?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 480 has 8 GB of GDDR5.

Q: What is the primary performance difference as shown in the data?

A: The RTX A5000 is significantly faster in all listed benchmarks. For example, it scores 3783 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, while the RX 480 scores 966, a difference of -74.5%.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same API levels?

A: No. The RTX A5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 480 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which card has dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI?

A: The RTX A5000 has 64 RT cores and 256 Tensor cores. The RX 480 has no such hardware.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The RTX A5000 has a 384-bit bus and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 480 has a 256-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 wins in every measurable category. It is the superior choice for heavy 3D rendering, video editing, scientific computing, and any workload that benefits from massive memory capacity and high compute throughput. Its 64 RT cores and 256 Tensor cores give it a unique advantage in ray-traced workflows and AI-accelerated tasks. The 24 GB memory buffer allows it to handle datasets that would be impossible for the 8 GB RX 480.

The AMD Radeon RX 480 has no benchmark wins to its name. Its only significant advantage is its lower power consumption, with a 150 W TDP compared to the RTX A5000’s 230 W. This makes it a less demanding card for a system’s power delivery and cooling, but it is a functional difference, not a performance one. The RX 480 also has a smaller physical footprint. For a user on a legacy system with strict power limits, the RX 480 is an option, but the data shows it is not a competitive one against the RTX A5000.

Specification Differences

The following table details the key specifications where the two cards differ, based solely on the provided data.

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 480 | NVIDIA RTX A5000 |

|:--- |:--- |:--- |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Samsung |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 45.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1120 MHz | 1170 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1266 MHz | 1695 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 768.0 GB/s |

| Memory Speed | 8 Gbps effective | 16 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 8192 |

| TMUs | 144 | 256 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| RT Cores | None | 64 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 256 |

| Pixel Rate | 40.51 GPixel/s | 162.7 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 182.3 GTexel/s | 433.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.834 TFLOPS | 27.77 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 230 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions (LxHxW) | 240 mm x 95 mm x 35 mm | 267 mm x 112 mm x N/A |

| Release Date | 2016-06-28 | 2021-04-11 |

| Launch MSRP | 229 USD | N/A |