AMD Radeon RX 6800 vs NVIDIA A2 Comparison

The NVIDIA A2 and AMD Radeon RX 6800 occupy entirely different corners of the graphics hardware landscape, yet both appear in the database with overlapping average benchmark scores that invite direct comparison. The A2 is a workstation-focused accelerator with no display outputs, while the RX 6800 is a dual-slot consumer gaming card with a full suite of video connections. Their recorded average benchmark scores differ by roughly 15%, but the individual test results reveal a more complex story about how each card handles different types of workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA A2 records an average benchmark score of 34,690, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800 scores 30,095. The A2 sits at the 79th percentile among all GPUs in the database, whereas the RX 6800 sits at the 75th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA A2 scores 35,357 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 44.3% higher than the RX 6800’s 24,508. This is the A2’s single strongest recorded victory in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: What happens in Geekbench Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 dominates the Vulkan test with a score of 115,107, beating the NVIDIA A2’s 34,023 by 70.4%. This is the largest margin of victory in either direction between the two cards.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The RX 6800 has 3,840 shading units and 240 TMUs, compared to the A2’s 1,280 shading units and 40 TMUs. The RX 6800 also has 96 ROPs versus the A2’s 32.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The RX 6800 offers 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 256-bit bus, while the A2 provides 200.1 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. Both cards have 16 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The NVIDIA A2 has a TDP of 60 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RX 6800 has a TDP of 250 W, uses two 8-pin power connectors, and suggests a 600 W PSU.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs stem from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA A2 uses the GA107 chip built on Samsung’s 8 nm process, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800 uses the Navi 21 chip fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm node. The process difference contributes to a major transistor disparity: the RX 6800 packs 26,800 million transistors across a 520 mm² die, whereas the A2 contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density favors the AMD chip at 51.5 million per square millimeter versus 43.5 million for the NVIDIA chip.

The A2 belongs to NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, specifically the Workstation Ampere generation, and features 10 RT cores and 40 tensor cores. The RX 6800 uses RDNA 2.0 and includes 60 RT cores but has no tensor cores. This fundamental difference means the A2 is equipped for AI acceleration tasks that rely on tensor core operations, while the RX 6800 focuses purely on rasterization and ray tracing through its RT core array.

Compute throughput diverges sharply. The A2 delivers 4.531 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and the same 4.531 TFLOPS in FP16 due to its 1:1 ratio. The RX 6800 offers 16.17 TFLOPS FP32 and 32.33 TFLOPS FP16 thanks to a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can process half-precision workloads at roughly twice its single-precision rate. Texture and pixel fill rates follow the same pattern: the RX 6800 achieves 505.2 GTexel/s and 202.1 GPixel/s, while the A2 manages 70.80 GTexel/s and 56.64 GPixel/s.

Clock speeds also differ substantially. The A2 runs at a 1440 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost, while the RX 6800 operates at 1700 MHz base, 1815 MHz game clock, and 2105 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) on the A2 versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on the RX 6800.

Physical and interface specifications reveal their distinct roles. The A2 is a single-slot card with no display outputs and a PCIe 4.0 x8 connection. The RX 6800 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, 120 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the RX 6800’s consumer orientation is clear from its connectivity suite.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between these cards, and each wins one. The NVIDIA A2 takes the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 35,357 against the RX 6800’s 24,508, a difference of 44.3%. This result is notable because OpenCL often favors higher compute throughput, yet the A2, with less than one-third the FP32 performance of the RX 6800, still emerges ahead. The A2’s 1:1 FP16 ratio and tensor core support likely contribute to this outcome, as OpenCL workloads can leverage mixed-precision paths that the RX 6800 handles with less efficiency.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells the opposite story. The RX 6800 scores 115,107, which is 70.4% higher than the A2’s 34,023. This margin is the single largest gap recorded between the two cards. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API that stresses raw shading throughput, memory bandwidth, and rasterization speed, all areas where the RX 6800’s 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a decisive advantage. The A2’s 1,280 shading units and 200.1 GB/s bandwidth simply cannot keep pace in this workload.

Looking at the broader benchmark context from the database, the A2’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB at 0.4% behind, the AMD Radeon HD 7970 at 0.4% behind, the NVIDIA TITAN V at 1% behind, and the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at 1.4% behind. This places the A2 in a tight cluster of professional and older workstation cards where performance differences are minimal. The RX 6800’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6700 at 1.1% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti at 0.5% behind, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Mobile at 0.6% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti at 1% behind. These are all high-end consumer gaming GPUs from recent generations, showing that the RX 6800 competes in a much faster segment.

The RX 6800 also has additional benchmark data beyond the head-to-head tests. Its Passmark G3D score is 22,067, Passmark GPU Compute is 10,864, and Geekbench Metal reaches 153,635. The A2 has no equivalent scores recorded for these tests. This asymmetry means the average benchmark score of 30,095 for the RX 6800 incorporates a wider range of workloads, including DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests plus 2D graphics, while the A2’s average of 34,690 derives from just two Geekbench results.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear distinction. The NVIDIA A2 is the stronger choice for compute-oriented workloads that use OpenCL or leverage tensor cores, as evidenced by its 44.3% lead in the OpenCL test and its 79th percentile ranking. Its 60 W TDP, single-slot design, and lack of power connectors make it suitable for dense server environments or workstations where space and power are constrained. The absence of display outputs confirms its role as an accelerator rather than a primary graphics card.

The AMD Radeon RX 6800 is the superior option for graphics-intensive tasks that rely on Vulkan or DirectX APIs. Its 70.4% lead in the Vulkan test, combined with its 16.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, positions it as a high-performance consumer GPU. The dual-slot form factor, 250 W TDP, and full display output suite indicate a card designed for gaming or content creation on a desktop. Its 75th percentile ranking places it slightly below the A2 overall, but the benchmark composition differs so substantially that direct average comparisons are misleading.

For workload selection, the A2 fits scenarios where compute density and low power draw matter more than raw graphics throughput. The RX 6800 fits scenarios where frame rendering, high-resolution textures, and API-level graphics performance are priorities. Users who require tensor core acceleration for AI inference or training have no option in the RX 6800, while users who need DisplayPort or HDMI output cannot use the A2 in a standalone capacity.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA A2 | AMD Radeon RX 6800 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 7 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 26,800 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 520 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 51.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1440 MHz | 1700 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1770 MHz | 2105 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 1815 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 200.1 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 40 | 240 |

| ROPs | 32 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 10 | 60 |

| Tensor Cores | 40 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 56.64 GPixel/s | 202.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 70.80 GTexel/s | 505.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.531 TFLOPS | 16.17 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 4.531 TFLOPS (1:1) | 32.33 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 60 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 267 mm x 120 mm x 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2021-11-09 | 2020-10-27 |