AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 sit at opposite ends of the GPU timeline in this database, and the recorded data reflects that gap in nearly every measurable category. The RTX 4090, built on TSMC's 5 nm process and carrying 76,300 million transistors, takes all three head-to-head benchmark wins against the Vega 64, a GlobalFoundries 14 nm part with 12,500 million transistors. The scale of those wins varies from roughly threefold to more than fivefold depending on the test. Below, the data is walked through test by test, followed by the architectural context and a use-case split.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only three tests appear in both cards' recorded results, and the RTX 4090 wins every one of them.

The largest gap is in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DirectX 12), where the RTX 4090 scores 9223 against the Vega 64's 1669, a delta of 452.6 percent. In practical terms, this DirectX 12 workload, which stresses modern rendering paths, shows the Ada Lovelace card delivering more than five times the throughput of the Vega 64. This is the widest spread of the three shared tests and reflects the combination of a much higher clock ceiling and far greater shading resources on the newer part.

Geekbench OpenCL lands at 255416 for the RTX 4090 versus 62552 for the Vega 64, a 308.3 percent advantage for NVIDIA. OpenCL is a general compute API, so this result indicates the gap is not confined to gaming-style rendering: raw compute throughput across open frameworks also favors the RTX 4090 by roughly a factor of four. The Vega 64 does post a stronger relative showing here than in Steel Nomad, which is consistent with its HBM2 memory subsystem and GCN 5.0 design, an architecture that leaned heavily on compute throughput for its era.

Geekbench Vulkan is nearly identical in outcome: 271631 for the RTX 4090 against 67032 for the Vega 64, a 305.2 percent margin. Vulkan is the modern low-overhead graphics API, and the RTX 4090's Vulkan 1.4 support pairs with its hardware resources to again deliver roughly four times the score. The Vega 64 supports Vulkan 1.3, so both cards can run current Vulkan workloads, but the performance ceiling differs enormously.

The head-to-head record therefore stands at 3 wins for the RTX 4090 and 0 for the Vega 64, with the smallest margin still exceeding 300 percent.

It is also worth reading the cards' database percentiles carefully, because they can mislead without context. The RTX 4090 sits at the 88th percentile against all GPUs in the database and the Vega 64 at the 86th, numbers that appear deceptively close. The average benchmark scores tell a clearer story: 60347 for the RTX 4090 versus 50001 for the Vega 64. That difference in the averages reflects a broader set of recorded tests rather than only the three shared ones, and the two cards' nearest-rival lists reinforce the point about how the database population shapes percentiles. The RTX 4090's closest rivals by average score include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, 0 percent delta), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60140, 0.3 percent), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61896, -2.5 percent), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657, 2.9 percent). The Vega 64's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (49957, 0.1 percent delta), the Intel Arc A550M (49737, 0.5 percent), the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (50951, -1.9 percent), and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT (48477, 3.1 percent).

Architecture Differences

The two cards are separated by architecture generations, process nodes, and memory philosophies.

The RTX 4090 uses the AD102 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated at TSMC on a 5 nm process. It packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 125.3M / mm². The Vega 64 uses the Vega 10 chip on GCN 5.0, fabricated at GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process, with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die and a density of 25.3M / mm². Density is roughly five times higher on the Ada part, which is what allows nearly the same die area to host six times the transistor count.

The execution resource counts scale accordingly. The RTX 4090 has 16384 shading units, 512 texture mapping units, and 176 render output units. The Vega 64 has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RTX 4090 also includes 128 RT cores for hardware ray tracing and 512 tensor cores; the Vega 64 predates both categories and has neither, with null entries in the database for both fields.

Clocks tell the same story. The RTX 4090 runs a 2235 MHz base and 2520 MHz boost clock, against 1247 MHz base and 1546 MHz boost on the Vega 64. The resulting theoretical rates diverge sharply: 443.5 GPixel/s and 1,290.2 GTexel/s for the RTX 4090, versus 98.94 GPixel/s and 395.8 GTexel/s for the Vega 64. FP32 compute is 82.58 TFLOPS on the RTX 4090 versus 12.66 TFLOPS on the Vega 64. The FP16 picture is more nuanced: the RTX 4090 lists 82.58 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Vega 64 lists 25.33 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning its half precision runs at twice its FP32 rate. Even so, the absolute half-precision throughput still favors NVIDIA by more than three times.

Memory is the one area where the Vega 64's design was forward-looking. It uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus delivering 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocked at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective). The RTX 4090 uses 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus at 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective), reaching 1.01 TB/s. The newer card doubles the effective bandwidth while tripling capacity, but the Vega 64's HBM2 approach was a deliberate high-bandwidth strategy for its time.

Platform and API support differ as well. The RTX 4090 connects over PCIe 4.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vega 64 connects over PCIe 3.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The display outputs differ too: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a on the RTX 4090, versus 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a on the Vega 64.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly on the shared benchmark record, the RTX 4090 wins every head-to-head test, so the use-case split is lopsided.

For DirectX 12 gaming and modern rendering workloads, the 452.6 percent Steel Nomad margin makes the RTX 4090 the clear choice among the two. For general-purpose compute through OpenCL, the 308.3 percent Geekbench margin favors it again, and Vulkan workloads follow at 305.2 percent. Add the 24 GB frame buffer and 1.01 TB/s of bandwidth, and the RTX 4090 covers scenarios, such as large-scene rendering and memory-heavy compute, that the Vega 64's 8 GB simply cannot hold.

The Vega 64's data-supported strengths are narrower. Its dual-slot, 295 W design with 2x 8-pin connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU is physically and electrically less demanding than the RTX 4090's triple-slot, 450 W, 1x 16-pin configuration with an 850 W suggested PSU. Its dimensions (280 mm long, 111 mm high, 40 mm wide) are smaller than the RTX 4090's (304 mm, 137 mm, 61 mm). Its FP16 ratio of 2:1 also means half-precision workloads gain a relative boost over its own FP32 baseline, even though the absolute numbers still trail. One recorded test, Geekbench Metal (68750), exists only for the Vega 64 in this database, so no direct comparison is possible there.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4090 than the Vega 64 in the shared benchmarks?

A: The margins are 452.6 percent in 3DMark Steel Nomad, 308.3 percent in Geekbench OpenCL, and 305.2 percent in Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 4090 wins all three shared tests.

Q: Do both cards support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The RTX 4090 has 128 RT cores and 512 tensor cores. The Vega 64 has neither, with null entries in both database fields.

Q: Which card has the higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4090, at 1.01 TB/s from 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus. The Vega 64 delivers 483.8 GB/s from 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus.

Q: How do the two compare on raw FP32 compute?

A: The RTX 4090 lists 82.58 TFLOPS FP32 against the Vega 64's 12.66 TFLOPS. The Vega 64's FP16 runs at a 2:1 ratio for 25.33 TFLOPS, while the RTX 4090's FP16 is 1:1 at 82.58 TFLOPS.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are listed as end-of-life. The RTX 4090 launched on September 19, 2022 with a launch MSRP of 1,599 USD; the Vega 64 launched on August 6, 2017 with a launch MSRP of 499 USD.

Q: What power supply does each card suggest?

A: The RTX 4090 carries a 450 W TDP and an 850 W suggested PSU, drawing power through 1x 16-pin connector. The Vega 64 has a 295 W TDP, a 600 W suggested PSU, and 2x 8-pin connectors.

Specification Differences

• Chip: AD102 (RTX 4090) vs Vega 10 (Vega 64)
• Architecture: Ada Lovelace vs GCN 5.0
• Process node: 5 nm at TSMC vs 14 nm at GlobalFoundries
• Transistors: 76,300 million vs 12,500 million
• Die size: 609 mm² vs 495 mm²
• Transistor density: 125.3M / mm² vs 25.3M / mm²
• Clocks: 2235 MHz base and 2520 MHz boost vs 1247 MHz base and 1546 MHz boost
• Memory: 24 GB GDDR6X, 384-bit, 1.01 TB/s vs 8 GB HBM2, 2048-bit, 483.8 GB/s
• Memory clocks: 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) vs 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective)
• Shading units: 16384 vs 4096
• TMUs: 512 vs 256
• ROPs: 176 vs 64
• RT cores / tensor cores: 128 and 512 vs none and none
• Pixel rate: 443.5 GPixel/s vs 98.94 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 1,290.2 GTexel/s vs 395.8 GTexel/s
• FP32 / FP16: 82.58 TFLOPS and 82.58 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 12.66 TFLOPS and 25.33 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 450 W vs 295 W
• Slot width: Triple-slot vs dual-slot
• Power connectors: 1x 16-pin vs 2x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 850 W vs 600 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a vs 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 vs 1.3
• Dimensions: 304 mm x 137 mm x 61 mm vs 280 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm
• Launch MSRP: 1,599 USD vs 499 USD

The Verdict

The data leaves little ambiguity. On every shared benchmark, the RTX 4090 beats the Vega 64 by at least 305 percent, reaching 452.6 percent in the DirectX 12 Steel Nomad test. It also brings hardware ray tracing, tensor cores, a 24 GB frame buffer, twice the memory bandwidth, and the more recent API feature set. Anyone selecting between these two for gaming, rendering, or GPU compute should choose the RTX 4090, with the caveat of its higher 450 W TDP, 850 W suggested PSU, triple-slot footprint, and larger physical dimensions.

The Vega 64's case rests on attributes outside raw performance: a lower TDP, a smaller dual-slot design, simpler power delivery, and its 2:1 FP16 ratio. Within this database, no shared benchmark favors it. The percentile figures (88 versus 86) may suggest proximity, but the head-to-head record, the theoretical throughput figures, and the average benchmark scores all point the same way: the RTX 4090 is the stronger card in every measured workload where the two can be directly compared.