AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 vs NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile Comparison

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 and NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile occupy different corners of the hardware spectrum, yet the recorded data places them in direct comparison. The AMD card, a desktop flagship from the Vega generation, posts a benchmark average of 50,001, while the NVIDIA mobile workstation part averages 39,568. The gap in aggregate performance is substantial, but the story is more nuanced when examining individual workloads and architectural intent. The database shows a clear winner in raw compute, but the RTX A500 Mobile brings a different set of capabilities that matter in specific contexts. The following analysis breaks down the measured results, architectural divergences, and specification differences to determine which GPU suits which role.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests both favor the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, and the margins are decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD card scores 62,552 against the NVIDIA card’s 41,263, a delta of 51.6 percent. This is not a narrow victory; it is a dominant one that reflects the Vega 64’s larger compute footprint and higher memory bandwidth. The OpenCL workload scales with raw shading power and memory throughput, both of which are heavily stacked in AMD’s favor. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile, with its 30 W power envelope, simply cannot match the desktop card’s sustained output in this synthetic compute scenario.

The Vulkan test shows an even larger disparity. AMD’s RX Vega 64 scores 67,032, while the RTX A500 Mobile manages 37,873, resulting in a 77 percent delta. Vulkan’s low-level API overhead rewards architectures with higher shader counts and faster memory subsystems, and the Vega 64 delivers on both fronts. The 77 percent gap is the single biggest measured difference between the two, indicating that the AMD card is not just faster but disproportionately faster in graphics-oriented compute tasks. The RTX A500 Mobile’s 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores do not contribute to these particular Vulkan tests, as the workload does not utilize ray tracing or tensor operations, leaving the NVIDIA part reliant solely on its 2,048 shading units.

Across both benchmarks, the AMD card wins 2 out of 2 comparisons, with zero wins for the NVIDIA part. The average benchmark scores reinforce this trend: the RX Vega 64 sits at 50,001, which places it in the 86th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RTX A500 Mobile’s 39,568 lands in the 82nd percentile. The percentile difference is smaller than the raw score gap might suggest, because the mobile part competes in a field of lower-power and older workstation GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39,555 average, 0 percent delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063 average, -1.2 percent delta), showing that the RTX A500 Mobile is closely matched with mid-range professional cards from a previous generation. The RX Vega 64, by contrast, sits near the RTX 5070 Ti (49,957 average, 0.1 percent delta) and the RX 6800 XT (48,477 average, 3.1 percent delta), indicating it trades blows with modern high-end desktop parts despite its age.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 leads with an average score of 50,001, compared to the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile’s 39,568. This puts the AMD card in the 86th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA part sits in the 82nd percentile.

Q: How much faster is the AMD card in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The RX Vega 64 scores 67,032 against the RTX A500 Mobile’s 37,873, a 77 percent advantage. This is the largest recorded performance delta between the two in any test.

Q: Does the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile have any benchmark wins?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests available (Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan), the NVIDIA card loses both. The wins tally is 2 for AMD and 0 for NVIDIA.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two architectures?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile, built on an 8 nm Samsung process, has a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The AMD RX Vega 64, on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, has 25.3 million per square millimeter, with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each GPU?

A: The AMD RX Vega 64 has a bandwidth of 483.8 GB/s using 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. The AMD card offers roughly five times the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports the DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders. The AMD RX Vega 64 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two GPUs is fundamental. The AMD RX Vega 64 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a massive 495 mm² die containing 12,500 million transistors. This yields a transistor density of 25.3 million per square millimeter, which is low by modern standards but reflects the older process node and the large, power-hungry design. The Vega 10 chip is built for desktop performance, with no dedicated ray tracing or tensor hardware. All 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs are general-purpose compute resources, and the FP32 throughput of 12.66 TFLOPS is nearly double the NVIDIA part’s 6.296 TFLOPS.

The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm Samsung process, with a far smaller 200 mm² die and 8,700 million transistors. The transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter is significantly higher, reflecting the more advanced manufacturing node. This chip includes dedicated hardware that the AMD card lacks: 16 RT cores for ray tracing and 64 tensor cores for AI-accelerated workloads. The FP16 performance is noteworthy: the RTX A500 Mobile achieves 6.296 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning it does not double-rate FP16 like the AMD part. In contrast, the AMD RX Vega 64 delivers 25.33 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, which is useful for certain compute tasks but not for gaming or general rendering.

The memory architecture also diverges sharply. The AMD card uses HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, providing 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth, while the NVIDIA part uses GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s. This is a fundamental design choice: the Vega 64 prioritizes bandwidth for high-resolution textures and compute, while the RTX A500 Mobile prioritizes power efficiency and compactness, as evidenced by its 30 W TDP and IGP slot width. The AMD card’s 295 W TDP and dual-slot design with 2x 8-pin power connectors are the physical manifestations of its performance-first approach.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets highlight the stark contrast in design goals. The AMD RX Vega 64 has a base clock of 1247 MHz and a boost clock of 1546 MHz, while the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile operates at 832 MHz base and 1537 MHz boost. The AMD card’s higher clocks, combined with its 4096 shading units versus 2048, explain its compute advantage. Texture and pixel rates follow the same pattern: the Vega 64 achieves 395.8 GTexel/s and 98.94 GPixel/s, while the RTX A500 Mobile manages 98.37 GTexel/s and 49.18 GPixel/s.

Memory capacity differs, with the AMD card offering 8 GB of HBM2 versus the NVIDIA card’s 4 GB of GDDR6. The bus width difference is extreme: 2048-bit versus 64-bit, which directly causes the bandwidth gap of 483.8 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s. The memory clock is also different, with the AMD card running at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective) and the NVIDIA card at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA part’s higher effective memory speed cannot compensate for the narrower bus.

Power and physical specifications are where the NVIDIA part pulls ahead. The RTX A500 Mobile has a TDP of 30 W, requires no power connectors, and is an IGP (integrated graphics package) for portable devices. The AMD RX Vega 64 has a TDP of 295 W, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU. The Vega 64 is 280 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, while the RTX A500 Mobile has no recorded dimensions, as it is designed to be integrated into laptops. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA, though this is unlikely to affect the benchmark results significantly.

The API support differs as well. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The display outputs also reflect their intended use: the AMD card has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the NVIDIA card’s outputs are described as “portable device dependent.”

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for users prioritizing raw compute and gaming performance. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is the superior GPU in every measured benchmark, with a 51.6 percent lead in OpenCL and a 77 percent lead in Vulkan. Its average score of 50,001 places it in the 86th percentile, comparable to modern high-end desktop cards like the RTX 5070 Ti and RX 6800 XT. The 8 GB of HBM2 memory and 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth make it suitable for high-resolution workloads and compute tasks that demand large data throughput. The trade-offs are severe: 295 W power draw, dual-slot size, and no ray tracing or tensor core support. This is a desktop part for users with a capable power supply and a chassis that can accommodate a 280 mm card.

The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile serves a different purpose, and the data shows it is not a competitor in raw performance. Its 39,568 average score places it in the 82nd percentile, but its nearest rivals are older professional cards like the AMD Radeon Pro 575 and Radeon Pro WX 7100. The 30 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin-and-light mobile workstations where power efficiency is paramount. The 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI workloads, which the AMD card cannot offer. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compliance mean it is more future-proof in terms of API features, even if its raw scores are lower.

The verdict depends on the use case. For desktop gaming, rendering, or general compute, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is the obvious choice, as it wins every benchmark and offers over five times the memory bandwidth. For a portable workstation requiring ray tracing, tensor operations, or minimal power draw, the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is the only viable option, despite its lower scores. The benchmark data does not favor the NVIDIA part in any performance metric, but its feature set and physical characteristics make it the right tool for a specific, narrow job. Users who need both high performance and mobility will find neither card fully satisfactory, but the database indicates that the AMD card dominates where it matters: raw speed.