AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile and NVIDIA RTX A400 occupy very different corners of the GPU market, and the benchmark data reflects that divide clearly. The RTX A400 is the decisive winner in the only head-to-head test available, but the Vega 10 Mobile’s integrated nature and low power envelope make it a distinct product for a different use case. The data shows a 71.7% deficit for the AMD part in Geekbench OpenCL, a gap that underscores the architectural and generational chasm between these two offerings.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison available—Geekbench OpenCL—is a landslide. The NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 22,844 points, while the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile manages only 6,476 points. That is a delta of -71.7% for the AMD part, meaning the RTX A400 delivers roughly 3.5 times the raw compute performance in this workload. This is not a close contest; it is a generational and architectural rout.

Context from the rival lists reinforces the verdict. The Vega 10 Mobile’s 6,476 score places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M (6,481) and just 0.3% behind the GeForce GT 555M (6,493). It even edges out the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 72 GB Blackwell by 1.1% (6,407), a fascinating data point showing that raw OpenCL scores do not always correlate with product tier. However, the RTX A400’s 22,844 score is not directly compared to any rival in its list, but its nearest competitors—GeForce MX230 (6,077), Quadro P2000 (6,049), Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6,117), and Radeon 760M (6,019)—are all clustered in the 6,000–6,200 range. That means the RTX A400 is roughly 270% faster than its closest listed rivals, a massive outlier in its own peer group.

The wins tally is one-sided: 0 for AMD, 1 for NVIDIA. There is no benchmark where the Vega 10 Mobile comes out ahead. The RTX A400 also holds a higher percentile rank at 35 versus Vega’s 37, though this is counterintuitive given the raw score gap—the percentile reflects all GPUs in the database, and the Vega’s integrated status likely skews its placement. The average benchmark score tells a similar story: RTX A400 at 6,078 (a figure pulled down by its Passmark sub-tests) versus Vega’s 6,476. The Geekbench OpenCL test is the only apples-to-apples comparison, and it is not close.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is stark, starting with the process node. The AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 uses an 8 nm process from Samsung. This translates to a significant transistor density difference: the AMD chip packs 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die for a density of 23.5M per mm², whereas the NVIDIA chip fits 8,700 million transistors into a slightly smaller 200 mm² die, achieving 43.5M per mm²—nearly double the density.

The cores and execution units tell a more nuanced story. The Vega 10 Mobile is built on GCN 5.0 architecture (chip codename Raven-M, generation "Vega IGP Raven Ridge-M") and features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The RTX A400 uses the Ampere architecture (chip GA107, generation "Workstation Ampere Ax000") and has 768 shading units, but fewer TMUs at 24 and double the ROPs at 16. In raw FP32 throughput, the RTX A400’s 2.706 TFLOPS easily surpasses the Vega’s 1.665 TFLOPS, a 62.5% advantage. The Vega does have a higher texture rate at 52.04 GTexel/s versus the RTX A400’s 42.29 GTexel/s, but the NVIDIA part wins on pixel rate: 28.19 GPixel/s versus 10.41 GPixel/s.

Feature support diverges sharply. The RTX A400 includes 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores, marking it as a hardware ray-tracing and AI-capable part. The Vega 10 Mobile has none of these. API support also differs: the RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both share OpenGL 4.6. The Vega’s FP16 performance is 3.331 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RTX A400 delivers 2.706 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning the AMD part has a theoretical half-precision advantage despite losing in FP32.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 wins in every measurable compute scenario from the data. In Geekbench OpenCL, it is 71.7% faster than the Vega. Its 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is the clear compute winner, and its 96.00 GB/s memory bandwidth on 4 GB of GDDR6 over a 64-bit bus provides dedicated, fast VRAM—versus the Vega’s system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." For any workload requiring sustained GPU compute, dedicated graphics memory, or ray tracing, the RTX A400 is the only choice from the data.

The Vega 10 Mobile’s wins are contextual rather than performance-based. Its 10 W TDP versus the RTX A400’s 50 W means it can operate in fanless or ultra-portable designs where power is the limiting factor. Its "System Shared" memory means no dedicated VRAM allocation is needed, simplifying system design. The Vega also has a higher texture fill rate (52.04 GTexel/s vs 42.29 GTexel/s), which could marginally benefit texture-heavy 2D workloads, and its FP16 output (3.331 TFLOPS) exceeds the RTX A400’s (2.706 TFLOPS) in half-precision tasks. However, these are narrow, niche advantages. The Vega’s Passmark scores are not listed, but its Geekbench OpenCL score of 6,476 places it in the same league as old mobile parts like the GT 555M (6,493) and Quadro M5000M (6,481), indicating it is a legacy-level performer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 22,844, which is 71.7% higher than the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile’s 6,476.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile have ray tracing capabilities?

A: No. The Vega 10 Mobile lists no RT cores, while the RTX A400 includes 6 RT cores.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 10 Mobile uses system-shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the system.

Q: How do the TDPs compare?

A: The Vega 10 Mobile has a 10 W TDP, while the RTX A400 has a 50 W TDP, a 5x difference.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX A400 achieves 43.5M transistors per mm² on an 8 nm process, versus the Vega 10 Mobile’s 23.5M per mm² on 14 nm.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in API support?

A: No. The RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 10 Mobile only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs, with the RTX A400’s values listed first where applicable:

• Process Node: 8 nm (NVIDIA) vs 14 nm (AMD)
• Foundry: Samsung vs GlobalFoundries
• Transistors: 8,700 million vs 4,940 million
• Die Size: 200 mm² vs 210 mm²
• Transistor Density: 43.5M / mm² vs 23.5M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1417 MHz vs 300 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1762 MHz vs 1301 MHz
• Memory Size: 4 GB vs System Shared
• Memory Type: GDDR6 vs System Shared
• Memory Bus Width: 64 bit vs System Shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 96.00 GB/s vs System Dependent
• Shading Units: 768 vs 640
• TMUs: 24 vs 40
• ROPs: 16 vs 8
• RT Cores: 6 vs None
• Tensor Cores: 24 vs None
• Pixel Rate: 28.19 GPixel/s vs 10.41 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 42.29 GTexel/s vs 52.04 GTexel/s
• FP32: 2.706 TFLOPS vs 1.665 TFLOPS
• FP16: 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 3.331 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 50 W vs 10 W
• Slot Width: Single-slot vs IGP
• Power Connectors: None (both), but RTX A400 has a suggested PSU of 250 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 vs IGP
• Display Outputs: 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a vs Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 vs 1.3
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: 2024-04-15 vs 2019-01-07
• Dimensions: 163 mm length, 69 mm height vs none listed
• Architecture: Ampere vs GCN 5.0
• Chip: GA107 vs Raven-M

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A400 is the superior performer in every head-to-head metric available. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 71.7% higher, its FP32 throughput is 62.5% greater, and it offers dedicated GDDR6 memory, RT cores, tensor cores, and modern API support. The Vega 10 Mobile’s only advantages are its lower 10 W power draw, higher texture rate, and higher FP16 output—plus its end-of-life status means it is a legacy product with no future.

Who should pick the RTX A400? Anyone needing actual GPU compute performance, modern feature support (ray tracing, DirectX 12 Ultimate), and dedicated VRAM. Its 50 W TDP and single-slot design make it suitable for compact workstations, and its 4 GB of GDDR6 is adequate for professional 2D and light 3D tasks. The RTX A400 is an active product with a clear successor path.

Who should pick the Vega 10 Mobile? Only those designing ultra-low-power systems where the 10 W TDP is non-negotiable and performance expectations are minimal. It is an integrated part with no display outputs of its own, relying on the portable device for output. Its 37th percentile rank versus the RTX A400’s 35th is misleading—the raw scores show a massive gap. The Vega is end-of-life, and its best-case scenario is matching a 2011-era GeForce GT 555M in OpenCL. For any real workload, the RTX A400 is the only defensible choice from this data.