AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM and the NVIDIA RTX A400. The AMD card has no benchmark entries, while the NVIDIA card has nine recorded scores across a range of tests. This absence of direct comparison data means the analysis must rely on architectural specifications and the RTX A400’s own benchmark results relative to its nearest rivals.

The RTX A400’s average benchmark score across all tests is 6078. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 22844, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 22237. These two scores are the strongest recorded outputs for the NVIDIA card. In contrast, the PassMark DirectX 10 score is 32, DirectX 11 is 37, DirectX 12 is 27, and DirectX 9 is 87. The PassMark G2D score is 899, while the PassMark G3D score is 5983. The GPU compute score is 2557.

The RTX A400 sits at the 35th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals show a tightly clustered performance band. The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 records an average score of 6077, a 0 percent delta. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 records 6049, a 0.5 percent delta. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 records 6117, a negative 0.6 percent delta. The AMD Radeon 760M records 6019, a 1 percent delta. These deltas indicate the RTX A400 performs within a narrow range of its direct competition, with no single rival exceeding a 1 percent difference.

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has no recorded benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. Its percentile rank is 50, which places it at the median of all GPUs, but this ranking is based on no measured data. The specification sheet indicates far higher theoretical throughput, but without benchmark results, the database cannot confirm how this translates into real-world performance.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 has measurable wins in every benchmark category where scores exist. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22844 and Vulkan score of 22237 indicate strong compute and graphics API performance. The PassMark G3D score of 5983 shows a reasonable 3D rendering capability for a low-power workstation card. The GPU compute score of 2557 reflects moderate general-purpose compute throughput.

The AMD RX 9050 OEM has no benchmark wins recorded, as no scores exist. Its theoretical specifications suggest it should win in raw throughput. The FP32 compute rate is 10.65 TFLOPS, which is 3.9 times the RTX A400’s 2.706 TFLOPS. The pixel rate is 166.4 GPixel/s versus 28.19 GPixel/s, a 5.9 times advantage. The texture rate is 166.4 GTexel/s versus 42.29 GTexel/s, a 3.9 times advantage. Memory bandwidth is 144.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s, a 1.5 times advantage.

The RTX A400 wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. It draws a TDP of 50 W, while the AMD card draws 92 W. The RTX A400 is single-slot with no external power connectors, while the AMD card is dual-slot with a single 8-pin connector. The RTX A400 measures 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The AMD card has no recorded dimensions.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM uses the Navi 44 chip built on RDNA 4.0 architecture. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The die contains 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 149.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX A400 uses the GA107 chip built on Ampere architecture. It is fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The die contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter.

The transistor count difference is substantial. The AMD chip packs 3.4 times more transistors than the NVIDIA chip. The die sizes are nearly identical, 199 mm² versus 200 mm², which makes the density difference stark. The AMD chip is over three times denser, enabled by the smaller 4 nm process node.

The AMD card has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also has 16 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA card has 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. It has 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. The NVIDIA card includes tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the NVIDIA card uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The display outputs differ significantly. The AMD card offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a. The NVIDIA card offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds differ across all measured points. The AMD card has a base clock of 1330 MHz, a boost clock of 2600 MHz, and a game clock of 1920 MHz. The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 1417 MHz and a boost clock of 1762 MHz, with no game clock specified. The AMD memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The NVIDIA memory clock is 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed.

Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus. The memory bandwidth differs: the AMD card delivers 144.0 GB/s, while the NVIDIA card delivers 96.00 GB/s. The AMD card is 1.5 times faster in memory bandwidth.

The power requirements differ. The AMD card has a TDP of 92 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and is dual-slot. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 50 W, requires no external power connector, and is single-slot. Both cards list a suggested power supply of 250 W.

The production status for both cards is Active. The AMD card was released on 2026-07-27, while the NVIDIA card was released on 2024-04-15. The AMD card belongs to the Radeon RX 9000 series and the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation. The NVIDIA card belongs to the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. The AMD card’s predecessor is Navi III, with no successor recorded. The NVIDIA card’s predecessor is Quadro Turing, and its successor is Workstation Ada.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has an FP32 rating of 10.65 TFLOPS, which is 3.9 times higher than the NVIDIA RTX A400’s 2.706 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both cards have 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus. The AMD card has a higher memory bandwidth of 144.0 GB/s compared to the NVIDIA card’s 96.00 GB/s.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD card has a TDP of 92 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 50 W and requires no external power connector.

Q: Does the NVIDIA RTX A400 have tensor cores?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA RTX A400 has 24 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM has no tensor cores.

Q: What is the RTX A400’s average benchmark score?

A: The RTX A400 has an average benchmark score of 6078, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6077, a 0 percent delta.

Q: Which card uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The AMD card uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA card uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. The AMD chip has a transistor density of 149.2 million per square millimeter, versus 43.5 million for the NVIDIA chip.

The Verdict

The database contains no benchmark results for the AMD Radeon RX 9050 OEM, which makes a direct performance comparison impossible. The AMD card’s theoretical specifications are dramatically higher across every compute metric. Its FP32 rate, pixel rate, texture rate, and memory bandwidth all exceed the NVIDIA card by factors ranging from 1.5 to 5.9. Its transistor count is 3.4 times higher, and it uses a more advanced 4 nm process. The AMD card also has more shading units, texture units, and raster operation units.

The NVIDIA RTX A400 has measurable benchmark results, placing it at the 35th percentile among all GPUs. Its average score of 6078 sits within 1 percent of its four nearest rivals, indicating a stable performance level. The RTX A400’s advantages are its lower power draw, single-slot form factor, no external power requirement, and tensor cores. It also has four display outputs compared to three on the AMD card.

The recorded data suggests the AMD card should deliver substantially higher raw performance based on specifications alone, but the absence of benchmark scores prevents confirmation. The NVIDIA card offers verified performance data and a compact, low-power design. The RTX A400 is the only card in this comparison with actual measured results in the database, while the RX 9050 OEM remains unverified. Users requiring tensor core support for compute workloads would select the NVIDIA card, as the AMD card has no tensor cores. Users prioritizing maximum throughput per the specification sheet would select the AMD card, provided its theoretical advantages materialize in practice.