AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH vs NVIDIA RTX A4000 Comparison

The benchmark data presents a stark generational and architectural divide. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH is a 2018-era integrated graphics processor built for compact portables, while the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is a 2021 workstation-class discrete GPU. In the only shared benchmark tests, the RTX A4000 is overwhelmingly dominant, but the Vega M GH still holds a specific niche based on its unique integration and efficiency profile.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A4000 wins every single head-to-head comparison where both products have data. In Geekbench OpenCL, it achieves a score of 105,739 compared to the Vega M GH's 27,125, representing a 74.3% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin is similar, with the RTX A4000 scoring 127,645 versus 31,268, a 75.5% advantage. This makes the RTX A4000 the clear choice for any compute-heavy workload, including GPU-accelerated rendering, scientific simulation, and machine learning inference, supported by its dedicated RT cores and Tensor cores.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH wins in the context of its form factor and power envelope. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 100 W TDP, designed to be embedded into a portable device. Its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it does not require a dedicated PCIe slot or external power connectors. The RTX A4000, by contrast, is a single-slot, 241 mm long card requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested power supply. Therefore, the Vega M GH "wins" in scenarios where a discrete GPU cannot physically be installed, such as in ultra-compact laptops or all-in-one systems. The data shows it is not a performance competitor, but a functional solution for a different class of device.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance based on the benchmark data?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4000 is significantly faster. It scores 105,739 in Geekbench OpenCL and 127,645 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH scores 27,125 and 31,268 in the same respective tests.

Q: What is the performance difference in the shared Vulkan benchmark?

A: The RTX A4000 leads by 75.5%. It produces a score of 127,645, while the Vega M GH produces 31,268.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH support modern graphics APIs?

A: It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RTX A4000 supports more advanced versions, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity and type?

A: The Vega M GH has 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus, providing 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A4000 features 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which product has a higher transistor density per square millimeter?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A4000 has a higher density at 44.4M transistors per mm², compared to the AMD's 24.0M per mm².

Q: Are both products still in production?

A: No. The data lists the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH as "End-of-life" and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 as "End-of-life."

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA RTX A4000 scores 105,739, which is roughly 3.9 times higher than the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH's 27,125. The delta percentage of -74.3% from the perspective of the AMD part illustrates the scale of the deficit. This test is a general-purpose compute benchmark, and the RTX A4000's massive advantage can be attributed to its 6,144 shading units versus 1,536, and its 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus 3.656 TFLOPS.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows an even larger absolute gap. The RTX A4000 posts a score of 127,645, while the Vega M GH manages only 31,268, a performance delta of -75.5%. This indicates the RTX A4000 is not just faster in raw compute but also excels in graphics API performance, likely due to its newer Ampere architecture supporting more advanced features. The RTX A4000's victory in both tests is not marginal; it is a categorical sweep, reinforcing its position as a professional-grade workstation part.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals a fundamental difference in design philosophy. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH is a 14 nm chip built by GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is an 8 nm chip from Samsung. The RTX A4000 uses a much larger die at 392 mm² versus 208 mm², and packs over three times the transistors (17,400 million vs 5,000 million).

Memory is another major divergence. The Vega M GH uses 4 GB of HBM2 with a 1024-bit bus, whereas the RTX A4000 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. Despite the narrower bus, the RTX A4000 achieves significantly higher memory bandwidth at 448.0 GB/s compared to 204.8 GB/s.

Clock speeds also differ wildly. The Vega M GH has a base clock of 1063 MHz and a boost of 1190 MHz. The RTX A4000 has a lower base clock of 735 MHz but a much higher boost clock of 1560 MHz. The RTX A4000 also features a larger number of execution units: 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, versus 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs on the AMD part.

The physical and power specifications are distinct as well. The Vega M GH is an IGP with a 100 W TDP and no power connectors. The RTX A4000 is a single-slot card measuring 241 mm in length and 112 mm in height, with a 140 W TDP, a single 6-pin power connector, and a suggested 300 W PSU. The bus interface is also different: IGP for the AMD and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is the core reason for the performance disparity. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH is based on the GCN 4.0 architecture, built on the Polaris 22 chip. This is an older design that lacks dedicated hardware for ray tracing (RT cores) and AI acceleration (Tensor cores). Its FP16 performance is listed as 3.656 TFLOPS (1:1) with its FP32, indicating no dedicated half-rate acceleration.

In contrast, the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA104 chip. This architecture introduces dedicated RT cores (48) and Tensor cores (192), providing hardware acceleration for ray-traced workloads and AI-based features. Its FP16 performance is also listed as 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1), but the presence of Tensor cores allows for much higher throughput in AI tasks that can utilize them. The RTX A4000 also supports newer API versions, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Vega M GH is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

The Verdict

The data is conclusive for performance: the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is in a completely different league. For any user whose primary criterion is compute performance, rendering speed, or modern graphics feature support, the RTX A4000 is the only choice between these two. Its benchmark scores are over 3.5 times higher, and it offers 16 GB of memory versus 4 GB, alongside hardware ray tracing and AI acceleration. It is a professional tool intended for demanding workstation tasks.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH should only be considered in a very specific context: an integrated solution. Its 100 W TDP, lack of external power connectors, and "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs make it a viable option for a compact system where space and power are at an absolute premium. It offers a baseline level of 3D performance (74th percentile vs 72nd for the RTX A4000) but cannot compete in absolute terms. The RTX A4000's 72nd percentile ranking despite its much higher raw scores suggests it is often compared against more powerful workstation cards, while the Vega M GH is compared against other integrated and entry-level parts. Ultimately, the choice is not about performance but about form factor: choose the Vega M GH only if a discrete card is impossible; choose the RTX A4000 for any real workload.