AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 vs NVIDIA CMP 50HX Comparison

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 represent two very different answers to the same question: how to build a high-performance GPU. The CMP 50HX is a Turing-architecture mining card with no display outputs, while the RX Vega 64 is a GCN 5.0 flagship that shipped with full video connectivity. Their average benchmark scores sit close together—the CMP 50HX averages 51,790 across its two recorded tests, while the RX Vega 64 averages 50,001 across four tests—yet their individual results diverge sharply depending on the workload. Both land in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, but the data suggests they achieve that status through entirely different strengths.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the data. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 62,552 against the CMP 50HX’s 56,135, a 10.3% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens dramatically: the Vega 64 posts 67,032 while the CMP 50HX manages only 47,445, a 29.2% deficit. This gives the RX Vega 64 a clean 2–0 sweep in direct comparisons, and it is the only GPU in this matchup with any recorded wins.

However, the CMP 50HX is not without its own territory. Its average benchmark score of 51,790 is 3.6% higher than the Vega 64’s 50,001 average, meaning that across all available tests (including those not shared), the NVIDIA card edges ahead. The CMP 50HX also sits closer to the top of its nearest-rival list: it is 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT, while the Vega 64 is 1.9% behind that same card. In raw compute density, the CMP 50HX delivers 11.07 TFLOPS of FP32 from 3584 shading units, whereas the Vega 64 offers 12.66 TFLOPS from 4096 shading units—the AMD card has more raw throughput, but the NVIDIA card achieves its numbers with fewer shaders.

For use cases, the data points to the RX Vega 64 as the stronger choice for Vulkan-based applications and OpenCL workloads that favor its architecture. The CMP 50HX, despite losing both direct tests, shows a higher aggregate score in its limited benchmark set, suggesting it may excel in tasks not captured by the head-to-head tests. The absence of display outputs on the CMP 50HX means it cannot drive a monitor, making it unsuitable for any interactive or visual workload—a decisive factor for most buyers.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA CMP 50HX averages 51,790 across its two recorded benchmarks, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 averages 50,001 across four tests. That is a 3.6% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: How does the RX Vega 64 perform in Vulkan compared to the CMP 50HX?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX Vega 64 scores 67,032 versus the CMP 50HX’s 47,445. The AMD card leads by 29.2%, its largest margin in any shared test.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The CMP 50HX uses 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus with 560.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX Vega 64 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 64 has a wider bus but less capacity and lower bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The CMP 50HX supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX Vega 64 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The NVIDIA card is one feature level ahead.

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

A: The RX Vega 64 has 4096 shading units and 256 texture units. The CMP 50HX has 3584 shading units and 192 texture units. AMD leads in both counts.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The CMP 50HX’s TU102 die has 24.7 million transistors per mm², while the RX Vega 64’s Vega 10 die has 25.3 million transistors per mm². The AMD chip is slightly denser despite being on a larger 14 nm node.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared benchmarks tell a clear story of AMD dominance, though the margins differ sharply. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX Vega 64 scores 62,552 against the CMP 50HX’s 56,135. That 10.3% delta is substantial but not overwhelming—the CMP 50HX remains within striking distance, likely due to its higher pixel rate (123.6 GPixel/s versus 98.94 GPixel/s) and superior memory bandwidth (560.0 GB/s versus 483.8 GB/s). The NVIDIA card’s GDDR6 memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the Vega 64’s HBM2 runs at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective), yet the AMD card still wins this compute test.

The Geekbench Vulkan result is where the gap becomes cavernous. The RX Vega 64 posts 67,032, a 29.2% lead over the CMP 50HX’s 47,445. This is not a marginal difference; it suggests the Vega 64’s architecture handles Vulkan’s explicit control model far better. The CMP 50HX’s Turing design, with its 56 RT cores and 448 tensor cores, may be optimized for compute patterns that do not translate to Vulkan efficiency. Notably, the Vega 64 has no RT cores and no tensor cores at all, yet it crushes the NVIDIA card in this test purely on raw shader throughput.

Looking at the rival lists provides additional context. The CMP 50HX is 3.6% ahead of the RX Vega 64 in average score, placing it between the RX 6900 XT (1.6% ahead) and the RTX 5070 Ti (3.7% behind). The Vega 64, meanwhile, sits 0.1% ahead of the RTX 5070 Ti and 0.5% ahead of the Intel Arc A550M, making it a very different competitive position. The NVIDIA card’s nearest rival list includes the Vega 64 itself, while the Vega 64’s list includes the RX 6800 XT, which the CMP 50HX does not face directly. These placements confirm that the CMP 50HX’s edge comes from consistency across its few tests, not from any single dominant result.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification category. The CMP 50HX has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the RX Vega 64 has 8 GB of HBM2. The NVIDIA card’s memory bus is 320-bit with 560.0 GB/s bandwidth; the AMD card uses a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units favor AMD: 4096 versus 3584. Texture units also favor AMD: 256 versus 192. Raster operation units favor NVIDIA: 80 versus 64. The CMP 50HX includes 56 RT cores and 448 tensor cores; the Vega 64 has none of either.

Clock speeds are nearly identical at boost: the CMP 50HX boosts to 1545 MHz, the Vega 64 to 1546 MHz. Base clocks differ slightly: 1350 MHz for NVIDIA, 1247 MHz for AMD. Memory clocks are very different: the CMP 50HX runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the Vega 64 runs at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective). Pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 123.6 GPixel/s versus 98.94 GPixel/s, but texture rate favors AMD at 395.8 GTexel/s versus 296.6 GTexel/s. FP32 compute favors AMD at 12.66 TFLOPS versus 11.07 TFLOPS; FP16 also favors AMD at 25.33 TFLOPS versus 22.15 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs differ too. The CMP 50HX has a TDP of 250 W, while the Vega 64 draws 295 W. Both are dual-slot with two 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 600 W PSU, but the CMP 50HX is shorter (267 mm versus 280 mm) and thinner (35 mm versus 40 mm). The CMP 50HX has no display outputs; the Vega 64 has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The bus interface also differs: the CMP 50HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4, while the Vega 64 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. API support: the CMP 50HX has DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4; the Vega 64 has DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX is built on the TU102 chip using the Turing architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 12 nm process. It packs 18,600 million transistors into a 754 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.7 million per mm². The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 uses the Vega 10 chip with the GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. It contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, for a density of 25.3 million per mm². Despite the older node, AMD achieves slightly higher density due to the smaller die.

The Turing architecture in the CMP 50HX includes dedicated RT cores (56) and tensor cores (448), which are absent from the Vega 64 entirely. This reflects a fundamental design split: NVIDIA’s card is a mining-specific variant of a gaming architecture, stripped of display outputs but retaining its compute accelerators. AMD’s GCN 5.0 design predates ray tracing and tensor acceleration, relying instead on a massive array of shading units (4096) and texture units (256) for throughput. The Vega 64’s memory subsystem uses HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, a high-bandwidth design that was advanced for its era, while the CMP 50HX uses GDDR6 on a narrower 320-bit bus.

The CMP 50HX’s PCIe 1.0 x4 interface is notably unusual—it limits host communication severely, which is acceptable for mining but would cripple gaming or general compute. The Vega 64’s PCIe 3.0 x16 is standard for its generation. The CMP 50HX also has no video outputs, meaning it cannot function as a display adapter, while the Vega 64 supports HDMI 2.0b and DisplayPort 1.4a. The NVIDIA card’s release date is 2021-06-23, nearly four years after the Vega 64’s 2017-08-06 launch, and the Vega 64 launched with an MSRP of 499 USD (stated once here as launch MSRP).

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a split decision. For any workload that involves Vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is the clear winner—its 29.2% lead in that test is decisive, and its OpenCL advantage of 10.3% reinforces its compute strength. The Vega 64 also offers display outputs, making it usable as a standard graphics card, and it achieves its results with 4096 shading units and 12.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. If the task is rendering, compute, or any application that uses Vulkan or OpenCL, the RX Vega 64 is the superior choice.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX, however, wins on aggregate. Its average benchmark score of 51,790 is 3.6% above the Vega 64’s 50,001, and it sits closer to the RX 6900 XT in its rival ranking (1.6% behind versus 1.9% for AMD). Its 10 GB of GDDR6 memory offers more capacity, its 560.0 GB/s bandwidth is higher, and its pixel rate of 123.6 GPixel/s exceeds the Vega 64’s 98.94 GPixel/s. With RT cores and tensor cores, it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which the Vega 64 cannot match. The CMP 50HX also consumes less power (250 W versus 295 W) and fits in a smaller physical footprint.

The decision hinges on purpose. For a user who needs a functional graphics card with video output and strong Vulkan performance, the RX Vega 64 is the only option—the CMP 50HX cannot display anything. For a compute-focused setup that does not require display output, the CMP 50HX’s higher average score, larger memory pool, and lower power draw make it the data-supported pick. The Vega 64 wins the direct comparisons, but the CMP 50HX wins the broader metric. Neither card is universally better; the data rewards matching the hardware to the workload.