AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 occupy completely different corners of the GPU market, and their specifications reflect that divide. The Vega M GH is a 14 nm integrated graphics processor designed for portable devices, while the RTX 8000 is a 12 nm dual-slot workstation monster with 48 GB of GDDR6 memory. Benchmark data shows the RTX 8000 winning both head-to-head tests by massive margins, yet both cards sit at the 74th percentile among all GPUs — a reminder that percentile rankings don't tell the whole story when comparing GPUs from different eras and use cases.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 in OpenCL workloads?

A: The RTX 8000 scores 101,883 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH scores 27,125. That is a 73.4% deficit for the Vega M GH — the RTX 8000 delivers roughly 3.75 times the OpenCL performance.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 8000 has 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its 384-bit GDDR6 bus, compared to 204.8 GB/s from the Vega M GH's 1024-bit HBM2 implementation. The RTX 8000 also has 12 times the memory capacity (48 GB vs 4 GB).

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH was released on 2018-01-31, and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 followed on 2018-08-12.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between these two chips?

A: Despite the RTX 8000 using a smaller 12 nm TSMC process versus the Vega M GH's 14 nm GlobalFoundries node, the densities are nearly identical: 24.7M transistors per mm² for the RTX 8000 and 24.0M per mm² for the Vega M GH.

Q: Does the RTX 8000 support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes. The RTX 8000 has 72 dedicated RT cores and 576 tensor cores, while the Vega M GH has none of either. This reflects the Turing architecture's focus on real-time ray tracing and AI acceleration.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 8000 scores 122,637 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 31,268 for the Vega M GH, a 74.5% difference. This is the RTX 8000's largest relative win in the benchmark data.

Architecture Differences

The Vega M GH is built on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The chip, codenamed Polaris 22, packs 5,000 million transistors into a 208 mm² die. It uses HBM2 memory with a 1024-bit bus, giving it 204.8 GB/s of bandwidth despite only having 4 GB of capacity. The GPU features 1536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, with a base clock of 1063 MHz and boost clock of 1190 MHz. Its FP32 throughput is 3.656 TFLOPS, with FP16 running at the same rate (1:1 ratio). The Vega M GH is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 100 W TDP, meaning it has no dedicated power connectors and its display outputs are portable-device dependent.

The RTX 8000 uses NVIDIA's Turing architecture on a 12 nm TSMC process. Its TU102 chip contains 18,600 million transistors across a 754 mm² die — more than three times the transistor count and 3.6 times the die area of the Vega M GH. Memory is 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 672.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GPU has 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 72 RT cores, and 576 tensor cores. Base clock is 1395 MHz with a 1770 MHz boost. FP32 performance is 16.31 TFLOPS, while FP16 reaches 32.62 TFLOPS thanks to a 2:1 ratio. The RTX 8000 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, requiring a 600 W suggested PSU and using 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega M GH caps out at DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

The transistor densities are almost identical (24.0M vs 24.7M per mm²), but the RTX 8000's advantage comes from sheer scale — four times the die area allows for fundamentally different compute capabilities, including RT and tensor cores that have no equivalent on the AMD part.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 wins both head-to-head benchmarks decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 73.4%, and in Geekbench Vulkan by 74.5%. For anyone needing maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, or ray tracing capability, the RTX 8000 is the clear choice based on these benchmarks. It also supports newer API features, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, and offers 48 GB of VRAM versus 4 GB — a 12-fold capacity advantage that matters for large datasets or high-resolution textures.

However, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH is not without a case. It is an integrated processor with a 100 W TDP, meaning it requires no separate card slot, no power connectors, and no additional cooling beyond what a portable device provides. The RTX 8000 needs a dual-slot chassis, a 600 W PSU, and external power. The Vega M GH's 74th percentile ranking matches the RTX 8000's percentile, and its average benchmark score of 29,197 is actually higher than the RTX 8000's 28,421 — though this is because the RTX 8000's average includes several low-scoring Passmark results that drag it down.

For a mobile workstation or compact system where power draw and physical space are the primary constraints, the Vega M GH is the only viable option of the two. For a desktop workstation where performance is king, the RTX 8000 wins every measurable benchmark and offers feature support the AMD part cannot match. The choice comes down to form factor versus raw capability — the data shows no scenario where the Vega M GH outperforms the RTX 8000 in compute.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Turing |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 5,000 million | 18,600 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 754 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1063 MHz | 1395 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1190 MHz | 1770 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 48 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 1024 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 204.8 GB/s | 672.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 96 | 288 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| RT Cores | None | 72 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 576 |

| Pixel Rate | 76.16 GPixel/s | 169.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | 509.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.656 TFLOPS | 16.31 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.656 TFLOPS (1:1) | 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 100 W | 260 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | N/A | 267 mm x 111 mm |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 9,999 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two benchmark tests, and the RTX 8000 wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 8000 scores 101,883 against the Vega M GH's 27,125, producing a delta of -73.4% for the AMD part. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 8000 scores 122,637 versus 31,268, a delta of -74.5%. The RTX 8000's Vulkan advantage is slightly larger than its OpenCL edge, indicating the Turing architecture scales particularly well in Vulkan workloads.

These margins are enormous — the RTX 8000 delivers roughly four times the performance in both APIs. The Vega M GH's FP32 throughput of 3.656 TFLOPS is less than a quarter of the RTX 8000's 16.31 TFLOPS, which explains the benchmark gap. The RTX 8000 also has higher clock speeds (1770 MHz boost vs 1190 MHz), more shading units (4608 vs 1536), and more than three times the texture fill rate (509.8 GTexel/s vs 114.2 GTexel/s).

It is notably the Vega M GH's average benchmark score of 29,197 exceeds the RTX 8000's 28,421, despite losing both head-to-head tests. This discrepancy comes from the RTX 8000's Passmark results, which include low scores in DirectX 10 (137), DirectX 11 (188), and DirectX 12 (79) tests. These legacy API benchmarks do not reflect the RTX 8000's modern compute capabilities, and its Passmark G3D score of 19,799 and GPU compute score of 9,992 are far more representative of its actual performance.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 8000 wins in every compute benchmark available in the dataset. Its 48 GB of GDDR6 memory with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth makes it suited for massive datasets, high-resolution rendering, and AI workloads that benefit from tensor cores. The 72 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature the Vega M GH lacks entirely. The RTX 8000's 16.31 TFLOPS FP32 and 32.62 TFLOPS FP16 performance puts it in a different performance class, and its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 means it can access newer graphics APIs.

The Vega M GH's advantages are not measured in benchmarks but in physical characteristics. It is an IGP with a 100 W TDP, fitting into portable devices with no slot requirement, no power connectors, and no external PSU recommendation. Its 1024-bit HBM2 bus provides respectable bandwidth for its power envelope, and its 74th percentile ranking shows it performs competitively against much larger discrete GPUs from its era — its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro W8000 (delta 0%), Intel Arc A370M (delta 0.1%), and AMD Radeon RX 470 (delta 0.7%). For a system builder prioritizing ultra-compact form factors or battery-powered operation, the Vega M GH is functionally the only choice between these two GPUs. For anyone building a desktop workstation with space and power budget for a dual-slot card, the RTX 8000's benchmark dominance makes it the obvious pick — provided the workload justifies its 48 GB memory pool and 260 W power draw.