AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for this comparison is limited to two compute-focused workloads, and in both, the NVIDIA RTX A400 dominates the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile by a wide margin. The Geekbench OpenCL result shows the RTX A400 scoring 22,844 against the Vega 8's 7,435, a delta of -67.5% for the AMD part. That is a lead of roughly 3.07 times the Vega 8's score. The Vulkan result tells a similar story: 22,237 for the RTX A400 versus 6,970 for the Vega 8, a delta of -68.7%. In both cases, the NVIDIA adapter more than triples the output of the integrated AMD solution.

The averages in the database reinforce this gap. The Vega 8 Mobile posts an average benchmark score of 7,203, while the RTX A400 averages 6,078. This apparent contradiction, where the RTX A400 wins every head-to-head test yet has a lower average, is explained by the benchmark mix. The RTX A400's average includes several Passmark scores, including a Passmark G3D score of 5,983 and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 2,557, along with DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 results that range from 27 to 87. The Vega 8 Mobile only has two Geekbench entries in the database. The RTX A400's average is pulled down by these additional, lower-scoring legacy tests, while its two Geekbench scores are far above the Vega 8's.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each part clarifies the positioning relative to the broader GPU landscape. The Vega 8 Mobile sits at the 39th percentile among all GPUs, with its closest neighbors being the GeForce GTX 750 at 7,222 (delta -0.3%), the GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7,171 (delta 0.4%), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 at 7,170 (delta 0.5%), and the GeForce GTX 970 at 7,157 (delta 0.6%). The deltas here are all under 1%, meaning the Vega 8's raw average is effectively level with these discrete cards from past generations. The RTX A400, by contrast, sits at the 35th percentile, with rivals like the GeForce MX230 at 6,077 (delta 0%), the Quadro P2000 at 6,049 (delta 0.5%), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6,117 (delta -0.6%), and the AMD Radeon 760M at 6,021 (delta 1%). Despite winning the head-to-head OpenCL and Vulkan tests decisively, the RTX A400's overall average places it in the lower third of the database percentile ranking.

The two Geekbench tests in the head-to-head section are the only direct comparisons available. There are no game-specific or synthetic DirectX benchmark deltas between these two specific parts in the recorded data. The wins for the Vega 8 Mobile number zero; the wins for the RTX A400 number two. That is the complete head-to-head picture.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 wins both recorded workloads, which are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In OpenCL, the RTX A400's 22,844 versus 7,435 represents a 67.5% deficit for the Vega 8. In Vulkan, the 22,237 versus 6,970 represents a 68.7% deficit. These are compute-oriented tests, so the data indicates a large advantage for the discrete NVIDIA card in general-purpose GPU compute and in the Vulkan graphics API.

The Vega 8 Mobile has no recorded wins in the head-to-head dataset. Its strengths, if any, lie outside the measured tests. The database contains no DirectX or OpenGL results for the Vega 8, so any claim about its performance in legacy APIs would be unsupported. What can be said is that the Vega 8's average score of 7,203 is higher than the RTX A400's average of 6,078. This is a statistical artifact of the different test sets, not a performance win. The Vega 8 has only two high-scoring Geekbench entries, while the RTX A400 has nine entries, several of which score in the low hundreds.

For users focused on compute workloads in OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX A400 is the clear choice based on the recorded measurements. For users who care only about the average benchmark score across all tests in the database, the Vega 8 appears higher, but that is due to missing data for the AMD part, not due to any measured superiority. The RTX A400 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 8 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, which suggests a more modern feature set for the NVIDIA card.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, different foundries, and different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile is built on the GCN 5.0 architecture, using the Raven-M chip, and fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA RTX A400 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA107 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The process node difference is substantial: 14 nm versus 8 nm, which contributes to the RTX A400's higher transistor density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter versus 23.5 million for the AMD part.

Transistor counts differ as well. The Vega 8 Mobile contains 4,940 million transistors on a die size of 210 mm². The RTX A400 contains 8,700 million transistors on a slightly smaller die of 200 mm². The NVIDIA chip packs nearly 76% more transistors into a smaller area, which aligns with the more advanced 8 nm node.

Clock speeds are not directly comparable in a meaningful way given the architectural differences, but the recorded values show the RTX A400 running at a 1,417 MHz base and 1,762 MHz boost, while the Vega 8 Mobile runs at 300 MHz base and 1,101 MHz boost. The memory subsystems are entirely different. The Vega 8 uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth at 1,500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

The compute unit counts favor the NVIDIA card. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, plus 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores. The Vega 8 Mobile has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores. The raw throughput numbers reflect this: the RTX A400 achieves 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 and 2.706 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the Vega 8 achieves 1,127.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 2.255 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). Pixel rate and texture rate also favor NVIDIA: 28.19 GPixel/s and 42.29 GTexel/s versus 8.808 GPixel/s and 35.23 GTexel/s.

The Vega 8 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and no dedicated slot width, drawing 25 W. The RTX A400 is a single-slot discrete card with no power connectors but a suggested PSU of 250 W and a TDP of 50 W. The bus interfaces differ: IGP for the AMD part, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the NVIDIA part. Display outputs also differ, with the Vega 8 being portable device dependent and the RTX A400 offering 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 7,203, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 has an average of 6,078. However, this is based on different test sets, as the RTX A400 has nine recorded benchmarks and the Vega 8 has only two.

Q: How large is the RTX A400's lead in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX A400 scores 22,844 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Vega 8 Mobile scores 7,435. The delta is -67.5% for the AMD part, meaning the RTX A400 achieves approximately 3.07 times the score.

Q: Does the Vega 8 Mobile win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows zero wins for the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile and two wins for the NVIDIA RTX A400, one in OpenCL and one in Vulkan.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The Vega 8 Mobile uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What API levels does each GPU support?

A: The Vega 8 Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the process nodes for the two chips?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA RTX A400 uses an 8 nm process at Samsung.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile | NVIDIA RTX A400 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Ampere |

| Process node | 14 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Samsung |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | 8,700 million |

| Die size | 210 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor density | 23.5M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base clock | 300 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1101 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Memory size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | System Dependent | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading units | 512 | 768 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| RT cores | None | 6 |

| Tensor cores | None | 24 |

| Pixel rate | 8.808 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 35.23 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,127.4 GFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.255 TFLOPS (2:1) | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 50 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 250 W |

| Bus interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2019-01-07 | 2024-04-15 |

| Predecessor | GCN 3.0 IGP | Quadro Turing |

| Successor | Navi II IGP | Workstation Ada |

| Length | Not specified | 163 mm (6.4 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

The Verdict

The data points in one direction for raw compute performance. The NVIDIA RTX A400 is more than three times faster than the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile in both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX A400 also has a more modern feature set, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, dedicated ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and a 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 throughput that doubles the Vega 8's 1,127.4 GFLOPS. For anyone running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the RTX A400 is the only reasonable choice from these two.

The Vega 8 Mobile is an end-of-life integrated part from 2019, built on an older 14 nm GCN architecture. Its only statistical advantage is a higher average benchmark score, which stems from having fewer, higher-scoring tests in the database. That is not a performance advantage in any measured workload. Its 25 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for compact portable devices, but the RTX A400, despite a 50 W TDP, offers dedicated GDDR6 memory, a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, and workstation-oriented display outputs.

The RTX A400 also has the edge in memory bandwidth, with 96.00 GB/s versus system dependent shared memory. The Vega 8 has more TMUs (32 versus 24) but fewer ROPs (8 versus 16) and far lower pixel and texture rates. The transistor density difference, 43.5M per mm² versus 23.5M per mm², highlights the generational leap between the two designs.

For users working with compute APIs, the RTX A400 is the clear pick. For users constrained to integrated graphics in a portable device, the Vega 8 Mobile exists as a legacy option, but the recorded benchmarks show no workload where it outperforms the RTX A400. The verdict is unambiguous: the RTX A400 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, has a newer architecture, more memory bandwidth, and a higher throughput ceiling. The Vega 8 Mobile's only claim is its higher average score, which is a function of incomplete data rather than measured superiority.