AMD Radeon RX 6800M vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive advantage for the AMD Radeon RX 6800M in the two shared benchmark tests. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the AMD card scores 2238, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB scores 1309. This represents a 41.5% deficit for the NVIDIA card, making the RX 6800M roughly 1.7 times faster in this modern DirectX 12 workload. The gap is substantial enough that any builder comparing these two for current-generation gaming or heavy graphics workloads should expect the AMD part to deliver markedly higher frame rates in DX12 titles.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6800M again takes the lead with a score of 87621, against 66998 for the RTX A2000 12 GB. The delta here is 23.5% in favor of AMD. While the OpenCL gap is smaller than the Steel Nomad delta, it still represents a clear performance tier separation. The NVIDIA card is not merely slightly behind; it trails by nearly a quarter of a full benchmark result, which in general-purpose compute workloads translates to meaningfully longer render times or simulation waits.

Interestingly, the average benchmark score across all recorded tests tells a slightly different story. The RTX A2000 12 GB has an average score of 34154, while the RX 6800M averages 28874. This inversion is explained by the fact that the RX 6800M has a much larger benchmark suite in the database, including several Passmark tests where it scores relatively low (for example, Passmark DirectX 12 at 65, Passmark DirectX 10 at 101), plus a Geekbench Metal score of 113721 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 94766. The NVIDIA card, with only two recorded benchmarks, benefits from having no low-scoring legacy tests dragging its average down. When comparing only the common tests, the AMD part wins both, but the overall aggregate profile differs due to test selection.

The percentile rankings also place the two cards in adjacent tiers. The RTX A2000 12 GB sits at the 79th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RX 6800M sits at the 74th percentile. This is a modest separation, suggesting that while the AMD part wins the head-to-head tests decisively, the NVIDIA card is still a strong performer relative to the broader GPU landscape. The nearest rivals for the RTX A2000 include the NVIDIA RTX A1000 with an average score of 34207 (0.2% higher), the NVIDIA TITAN V at 34355 (0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT at 34133 (0.1% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 480 at 33997 (0.5% lower). All four rivals are within 0.6% of the RTX A2000's average, making it a tightly clustered group. For the RX 6800M, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 570 at 28766 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996 (0.4% higher in reverse, meaning the RX 6800M is 0.4% lower), the AMD Radeon R9 M295X at 28580 (1% lower), and the Intel Arc A370M at 29175 (1% higher). The RX 6800M's cluster is similarly tight, with all rivals within 1% of its average.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6800M wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, so in direct comparison it is the faster card for DX12 gaming and for OpenCL compute. The 3DMark Steel Nomad result is particularly relevant for gamers, as it represents a modern DirectX 12 workload with ray tracing and heavy shading. A 41.5% lead here is not a marginal difference; it is a full generation-class gap in raw rasterization and ray tracing performance. For anyone building a system where current game performance is the priority, the RX 6800M is the clear choice based on this data alone.

The RTX A2000 12 GB, despite losing both shared tests, still holds advantages that are visible in the database. Its average benchmark score is higher (34154 vs 28874), and its percentile ranking is higher (79th vs 74th). This suggests that in a broader suite of tests, particularly those that reward NVIDIA's architecture characteristics, the A2000 can outperform its raw head-to-head numbers. The A2000 also has a much lower TDP at 70 W, compared to 145 W for the RX 6800M. For applications where power draw is a constraint, such as small form factor workstations or systems with modest power supplies, the NVIDIA card is more efficient per watt, even if it loses on absolute performance. The A2000 is a dual-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the RX 6800M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) designed for mobile platforms, with no standalone card dimensions listed.

For workstation tasks, the A2000's architecture includes 104 tensor cores, which the RX 6800M lacks entirely. This gives the NVIDIA card a functional advantage in AI and machine learning workloads that leverage Tensor Core acceleration. The A2000 also has 26 RT cores, compared to 40 on the RX 6800M, though the AMD part's higher clock speeds and pixel rate (153.0 GPixel/s vs 57.60 GPixel/s) suggest it handles traditional rasterization much faster. The RX 6800M's texture rate of 382.4 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s for the A2000 further confirms the AMD card's dominance in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB uses the GA106 chip, built on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The die size is 276 mm², housing 12,000 million transistors, which works out to a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon RX 6800M uses the Navi 22 chip, built on RDNA 2.0, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The die is larger at 335 mm², with 17,200 million transistors, giving a higher density of 51.3 million per square millimeter. The smaller process node and larger die give AMD a raw transistor count advantage of 43% more transistors.

Clock speeds diverge significantly. The RX 6800M runs a base clock of 2116 MHz, a game clock of 2300 MHz, and a boost clock of 2390 MHz. The RTX A2000 has a base clock of just 562 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz. This nearly 2x boost clock difference explains why the AMD card achieves 12.24 TFLOPS FP32 performance against 7.987 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA card, despite having fewer shading units (2560 vs 3328). The RX 6800M also offers FP16 performance of 24.47 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the A2000 provides only 7.987 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. Memory bandwidth also favors AMD: 384.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s, both using 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, but the RX 6800M runs its memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the A2000.

The feature sets reflect their target markets. The A2000 is a workstation card with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, a dual-slot form factor, and no power connectors. The RX 6800M is a mobile IGP with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it relies on laptop display routing. The A2000 has tensor cores (104) for AI acceleration; the RX 6800M has none. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The A2000's release date is 2021-11-22, while the RX 6800M released earlier on 2021-05-30. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in DirectX 12 gaming?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800M, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2238 versus 1309 for the RTX A2000, a 41.5% advantage.

Q: Does the RTX A2000 have any compute advantage?

A: Yes, it has 104 tensor cores, which the RX 6800M lacks, making it better suited for AI and machine learning workloads that use Tensor Core acceleration.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RTX A2000 has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the RX 6800M has a TDP of 145 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6800M, at 384.0 GB/s, compared to 288.0 GB/s for the RTX A2000, despite both having 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life products.

Q: What is the overall benchmark percentile for each?

A: The RTX A2000 is at the 79th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6800M is at the 74th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB | AMD Radeon RX 6800M |

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

| Chip | GA106 | Navi 22 |

| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process node | 8 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,000 million | 17,200 million |

| Die size | 276 mm² | 335 mm² |

| Transistor density | 43.5M / mm² | 51.3M / mm² |

| Base clock | 562 MHz | 2116 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1200 MHz | 2390 MHz |

| Game clock | None | 2300 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 3328 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 104 | 160 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| RT cores | 26 | 40 |

| Tensor cores | 104 | None |

| Pixel rate | 57.60 GPixel/s | 153.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 124.8 GTexel/s | 382.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.987 TFLOPS | 12.24 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) | 24.47 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 70 W | 145 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | None |

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 167 mm / 6.6 inches length, 69 mm / 2.7 inches height | None listed |

| Release date | 2021-11-22 | 2021-05-30 |

| Launch MSRP | 449 USD | None |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case. If raw graphics performance and modern game support are the priority, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M is the stronger choice. It wins both shared benchmarks by substantial margins (41.5% in Steel Nomad, 23.5% in OpenCL), has higher memory bandwidth, higher pixel and texture rates, and higher FP32 throughput. It also offers FP16 at double the FP32 rate, which benefits certain compute workloads. Its 7 nm process and larger die provide more transistors and higher density, and it has 40 RT cores for ray tracing.

However, the RTX A2000 12 GB is not without compelling arguments. Its lower TDP of 70 W makes it far easier to cool and power, especially in small workstations. The inclusion of 104 tensor cores is a decisive factor for anyone doing AI inference or training at small scale. Its higher average benchmark score (34154 vs 28874) and higher percentile ranking (79th vs 74th) indicate that in a broader test battery, it holds up well against the RX 6800M's aggregate. The A2000 also has a defined launch MSRP of 449 USD, whereas the RX 6800M has no MSRP listed, reflecting its mobile-only origin.

For a desktop workstation with a modest power budget and a need for tensor-accelerated AI, the RTX A2000 is the practical pick. For a laptop or a system where maximum FPS and compute throughput are the only metrics that matter, the RX 6800M wins outright. The benchmark data does not support a single universal winner; it supports a decision based on whether the workload favors tensor cores and efficiency or raw throughput and memory bandwidth. The RX 6800M is the faster card by every head-to-head measurement, but the A2000's architecture brings capabilities that no benchmark in this database can quantify.