AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two cards into distinct use-case camps. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins in overall average benchmark score and in the synthetic OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 takes the single head-to-head DirectX 12 test.

For the RTX A2000, the database shows an average benchmark score of 46043, which places it at the 85th percentile of all GPUs. That average is built on a Geekbench OpenCL score of 67695 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 69089. These results indicate a card that handles compute-oriented APIs with consistency. The OpenCL score is particularly strong, as it outpaces the Vega 56's only compute result, a Geekbench Metal score of 73512, when considering the different API workloads.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 counters with a higher raw score in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test, where it records 1501 points against the RTX A2000's 1345 points. That is a 10.4% advantage for the Vega 56 in this specific workload. However, the Vega 56's overall average benchmark score sits at 37507, which is notably lower than the RTX A2000's 46043. The Vega 56 also ranks at the 81st percentile of all GPUs, four points below the RTX A2000's 85th percentile.

The verdict from the data: the RTX A2000 is the better all-rounder for compute and general benchmark performance, while the Vega 56 shows a specific strength in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 scenario. Users prioritizing that particular test would lean toward the Vega 56. Users looking for broader compute performance across OpenCL and Vulkan would find the RTX A2000 more capable.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 uses the GA106 chip built on Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The die size measures 276 mm², with 12,000 million transistors and a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. Its die is substantially larger at 495 mm², holding 12,500 million transistors, but with a lower transistor density of 25.3M per mm².

The RTX A2000 implements 3328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. It also includes dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations: 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores. The Vega 56 has more shading units at 3584, more TMUs at 224, and more ROPs at 64, but it has no RT cores and no tensor cores. This makes the RTX A2000 the only one of the two with hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI-based workloads.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The RTX A2000 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a massive 2048-bit bus, producing 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 56's memory bandwidth advantage is substantial, which explains its higher pixel and texture rates. The Vega 56 records 94.14 GPixel/s and 329.5 GTexel/s, while the RTX A2000 records 57.60 GPixel/s and 124.8 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds differ as well. The RTX A2000 runs at a 562 MHz base clock and a 1200 MHz boost clock, with memory at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The Vega 56 runs at a 1156 MHz base clock and a 1471 MHz boost clock, with memory at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). Despite lower clock speeds, the RTX A2000 achieves a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio at 7.987 TFLOPS for both. The Vega 56 reaches 10.54 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.09 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio.

Power requirements reflect the architectural differences. The RTX A2000 has a 70 W TDP, requires no external power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The Vega 56 has a 210 W TDP, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The RTX A2000 is also physically smaller at 167 mm length and 69 mm height, versus the Vega 56's 280 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. Both are dual-slot cards.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has an average benchmark score of 46043, which is significantly higher than the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56's average of 37507.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 win any benchmark against the RTX A2000?

A: Yes, in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test, the Vega 56 scores 1501 points versus the RTX A2000's 1345 points, a 10.4% advantage for the AMD card.

Q: Which card supports hardware ray tracing?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX A2000 includes dedicated RT cores, with 26 of them. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 has no RT cores listed in the database.

Q: How do their memory types and bandwidth compare?

A: The RTX A2000 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth, giving the AMD card 121.6 GB/s more bandwidth.

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

A: The RTX A2000 has a 70 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, while the Vega 56 has a 210 W TDP and requires two 8-pin power connectors. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the RTX A2000 and 550 W for the Vega 56.

Q: Which card ranks higher among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX A2000 sits at the 85th percentile, while the Vega 56 sits at the 81st percentile. The RTX A2000 also has a higher average benchmark score of 46043 versus 37507.

Specification Differences

The database lists the following specification differences between the two cards:

• Chip and architecture: NVIDIA GA106 (Ampere) versus AMD Vega 10 (GCN 5.0)
• Process node: 8 nm (Samsung) versus 14 nm (GlobalFoundries)
• Transistors: 12,000 million versus 12,500 million
• Die size: 276 mm² versus 495 mm²
• Transistor density: 43.5M / mm² versus 25.3M / mm²
• Base clock: 562 MHz versus 1156 MHz
• Boost clock: 1200 MHz versus 1471 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective)
• Memory size: 6 GB GDDR6 versus 8 GB HBM2
• Memory bus width: 192 bit versus 2048 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 288.0 GB/s versus 409.6 GB/s
• Shading units: 3328 versus 3584
• Texture mapping units: 104 versus 224
• Render output units: 48 versus 64
• RT cores: 26 versus none
• Tensor cores: 104 versus none
• Pixel rate: 57.60 GPixel/s versus 94.14 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 124.8 GTexel/s versus 329.5 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 7.987 TFLOPS versus 10.54 TFLOPS
• FP16 performance: 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 21.09 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 70 W versus 210 W
• Power connectors: None versus 2x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 250 W versus 550 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.3
• Dimensions: 167 mm length, 69 mm height versus 280 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width
• Release date: August 9, 2021 versus August 13, 2017
• Launch MSRP: 449 USD versus 399 USD

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test. In that test, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 scores 1501 points, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 1345 points. The delta is 10.4% in favor of the AMD card, making it the sole winner in the head-to-head comparison.

This single result tells a focused story. The Vega 56, despite its older architecture and lower average benchmark score, demonstrates a clear advantage in this specific DirectX 12 workload. The 1501 points represent a substantial lead over the RTX A2000's 1345 points. For users running 3DMark Steel Nomad specifically, the Vega 56 is the stronger performer.

However, the broader benchmark picture favors the RTX A2000. The RTX A2000's average benchmark score of 46043 exceeds the Vega 56's 37507 by a large margin. The RTX A2000 also posts competitive scores in Geekbench OpenCL (67695) and Geekbench Vulkan (69089), while the Vega 56's only non-3DMark result is a Geekbench Metal score of 73512. These workloads measure different API capabilities, and the RTX A2000's scores across OpenCL and Vulkan indicate stronger compute flexibility than the Vega 56's single Metal result.

The nearest rivals in the database provide additional context. The RTX A2000 sits within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (46601) and the Intel Arc A530M (46614), and within 1% of the Intel Arc A730M (45592). The Vega 56 sits within 0.9% of the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37157), within 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (37648), and within 1.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38135). These proximity values show that the RTX A2000 competes in a higher average-score tier than the Vega 56.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 is the better choice for general compute workloads, as evidenced by its higher average benchmark score of 46043 versus 37507, its 85th percentile ranking versus 81st, and its strong OpenCL and Vulkan results. It also offers hardware ray tracing and tensor cores, features the Vega 56 lacks entirely. Its 70 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it a far easier card to integrate into a system, and its smaller physical footprint at 167 mm length versus 280 mm adds to that flexibility.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is the better choice for the specific 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test, where it beats the RTX A2000 by 10.4% with a score of 1501 versus 1345. It also offers more memory (8 GB versus 6 GB) and significantly higher memory bandwidth (409.6 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s), which could benefit workloads sensitive to memory throughput. Its higher pixel rate of 94.14 GPixel/s and texture rate of 329.5 GTexel/s also exceed the RTX A2000's respective rates.

For a professional workstation GPU, the RTX A2000's feature set and average benchmark dominance make it the more compelling option. The lack of RT and tensor cores on the Vega 56 is a decisive factor for any modern workload involving ray tracing or AI acceleration. The Vega 56 remains a viable choice only if the 3DMark Steel Nomad workload or raw memory bandwidth is the primary requirement. Otherwise, the RTX A2000 is the superior card according to the recorded measurements.