AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is dramatically faster, scoring 32,011 versus the Vega 10 Mobile's 6,476. This represents a 79.8% lead for the RX 6400.

Q: How does the Vega 10 Mobile compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The data shows it sits in a tight cluster. It trails the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M by 0.1%, the GeForce GT 555M by 0.3%, and the GeForce GTX 670M by 0.6%. It is 1.1% ahead of the RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell.

Q: What is the RX 6400's position relative to its competition?

A: Its average score of 6,001 places it nearly even with the GeForce GTX 770M (0% delta), while it leads the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server by 0.1%, the FirePro W4100 by 0.2%, and the Quadro K4000M by 0.3%.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The RX 6400 achieves 74.27 GPixel/s, which is over seven times higher than the Vega 10 Mobile's 10.41 GPixel/s.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Vega 10 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Vega 10 Mobile uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system-dependent. The RX 6400 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectural generations. The Vega 10 Mobile uses the GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. In contrast, the RX 6400 employs RDNA 2.0, fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process, packing 5,400 million transistors into a much smaller 107 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story: the RX 6400 achieves 50.5 million transistors per mm² versus 23.5 million per mm² for the Vega part.

Feature support diverges sharply. The RX 6400 includes 12 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the Vega 10 Mobile. This enables hardware-accelerated ray tracing on the RX 6400, a significant architectural leap. The Vega IGP is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 6400 reaches DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to Vulkan 1.3 on the older chip.

Compute resources differ in scale. The Vega 10 Mobile has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and only 8 ROPs. The RX 6400 increases this to 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The ROP count is particularly notable — a quadrupling that directly contributes to its vastly higher pixel throughput.

Clock speeds show a generational shift. The Vega 10 Mobile runs at a 300 MHz base and 1301 MHz boost, while the RX 6400 operates at 1923 MHz base, 2039 MHz game clock, and a 2321 MHz boost. The memory subsystem is also fundamentally different: the Vega IGP shares system memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the RX 6400 has its own 4 GB GDDR6 pool.

Power characteristics reflect their intended roles. The Vega 10 Mobile is a 10 W IGP designed for portable devices, with no power connectors and no slot width. The RX 6400 is a 53 W single-slot card that also requires no power connectors, but AMD recommends a 250 W power supply. The RX 6400 connects via PCIe 4.0 x4, while the Vega part uses the integrated IGP bus interface.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one direct benchmark comparison exists in the data: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are decisive. The RX 6400 scores 32,011, while the Vega 10 Mobile manages just 6,476. The delta is reported as -79.8% from the RX 6400's perspective, meaning the Vega part delivers only about one-fifth of the RX 6400's compute performance in this workload.

This single head-to-head result aligns with the broader specification gap. The RX 6400's FP32 throughput of 3.565 TFLOPS is more than double the Vega 10 Mobile's 1.665 TFLOPS. Texture fill rate shows a similar pattern: 111.4 GTexel/s versus 52.04 GTexel/s. The pixel rate gap is even more pronounced, with the RX 6400 hitting 74.27 GPixel/s against 10.41 GPixel/s.

The benchmark data also reveals that the RX 6400's average score across all tests (6,001) is lower than its OpenCL score alone, indicating that its performance varies significantly across different workloads. The Vega 10 Mobile's average benchmark score equals its single OpenCL result at 6,476, since that is the only test recorded for it.

Percentile rankings are close despite the massive OpenCL gap. The Vega 10 Mobile sits at the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6400 is at the 35th percentile. This suggests that while the RX 6400 excels in compute-heavy tasks, its overall standing across the broader GPU landscape is similar to the older integrated part.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 6400 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 1923 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1301 MHz | 2321 MHz |

| Game Clock | — | 2039 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 768 |

| TMUs | 40 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| RT Cores | — | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.41 GPixel/s | 74.27 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 52.04 GTexel/s | 111.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.665 TFLOPS | 3.565 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.331 TFLOPS (2:1) | 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 10 W | 53 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | — | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2019-01-07 | 2022-01-18 |

| Launch MSRP | — | 159 USD |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6400 wins in nearly every measurable computing category. Its advantages in raw compute, memory bandwidth, and feature support make it the clear choice for gaming and graphics-intensive workloads. The ray tracing cores alone set it apart for modern titles that leverage DirectX 12 Ultimate features. Its 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory at 128.0 GB/s eliminates the system-memory bottleneck that constrains the Vega IGP. For desktop users who can accommodate a 53 W single-slot card, the RX 6400 delivers roughly five times the OpenCL performance of its rival.

The Vega 10 Mobile's domain is ultra-portable computing. Its 10 W TDP, IGP form factor, and system-dependent memory mean it requires no additional power connectors and no expansion slot. It is designed for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency and thermal headroom are paramount. The data shows it is competitive with older discrete mobile GPUs like the GeForce GTX 670M, trailing by only 0.6%, which is respectable for an integrated solution from 2019.

The use-case split is straightforward. The RX 6400 is for users who need discrete performance in a compact desktop or who want ray tracing on a budget. The Vega 10 Mobile is for portable devices where the CPU and GPU share system memory, and where the 10 W power envelope is a hard constraint. The RX 6400's 250 W suggested PSU requirement also indicates it belongs in a system with a real power supply, not a battery-powered device.

In benchmark terms, the RX 6400 dominates the OpenCL head-to-head, but the Vega 10 Mobile holds its own in percentile rankings at 37th versus 35th. This indicates that the Vega IGP is well-optimized for its niche, while the RX 6400's high compute performance is offset by other factors in the broader GPU landscape. For users deciding between them, the question is not which is faster — it is which fits the physical and power constraints of their system.