AMD Radeon Vega 8 vs NVIDIA GRID K2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits the two benchmark results cleanly down the middle, with each GPU claiming one victory. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 dominates the Geekbench Metal workload, posting a score of 10706 against the NVIDIA GRID K2’s 5557. That is a 92.7% advantage, a decisive margin that reflects the Vega IGP’s strength in Apple’s Metal API environment. The GRID K2, by contrast, trails by nearly half in that specific test, a result that places it far behind in any Metal-centric workload.

The tables turn in the OpenCL test. The GRID K2 scores 10602, while the Vega 8 manages 8822, giving NVIDIA a 16.8% lead. This is not a narrow victory; it is a substantial gap that shows the GRID K2’s compute-oriented design has real merit in general-purpose GPU workloads. The two cards thus trade blows based on the API in question, with AMD winning the Metal round and NVIDIA winning the OpenCL round.

Context from the broader database matters here. The Vega 8’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 9221, placing it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 890M at 9210 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 at 9273 (0.6% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M at 9302 (0.9% ahead). These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the Vega 8 sits in a tightly packed performance cluster where small differences separate adjacent products.

The GRID K2’s average score is 8080, which lands it at the 42nd percentile. Its nearest rivals are similarly close: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost at 8067 (0.2% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce 945M at 8099 (0.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti at 8053 (0.3% ahead). The 14% gap between the two cards’ average scores (9221 versus 8080) is consistent with the head-to-head results, where neither GPU fully dominates but the AMD part holds a meaningful overall edge in the database’s aggregate metric.

What stands out is the asymmetry of the wins. The Metal test is a blowout, while the OpenCL test is a solid but less dramatic margin. This suggests that the Vega 8’s architecture is particularly well-suited to Metal’s execution model, whereas the GRID K2’s Kepler design remains competitive in the more mature OpenCL ecosystem. For buyers or system integrators evaluating these parts, the choice depends heavily on the software stack: Metal-heavy environments favor AMD decisively, while OpenCL-heavy workloads shift the balance toward NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different foundries and process nodes, and that distinction shapes their entire design philosophy. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a Raven chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture. It belongs to the Vega IGP generation under the Raven Ridge codename family. The NVIDIA GRID K2, by contrast, uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a GK104 chip built on the older Kepler architecture. The process gap is significant: 14 nm versus 28 nm, and the transistor density figures reflect that advantage. The Vega 8 packs 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, yielding 23.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The GRID K2 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, which works out to 12.0 million per square millimeter. AMD’s density advantage is nearly double, a direct consequence of the newer process node.

The memory subsystem differs fundamentally. The Vega 8 uses system-shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and bandwidth that is system dependent. The GRID K2 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256 bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a classic IGP versus discrete GPU split: the Vega 8 relies on the host system’s RAM, while the GRID K2 has its own high-speed pool. The GRID K2’s memory clock is listed at 1250 MHz, with an effective data rate of 5 Gbps.

Compute resources tell a similar story. The Vega 8 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The GRID K2 has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. NVIDIA’s part has triple the shader count and quadruple the TMUs and ROPs. This explains why the GRID K2’s pixel rate is 23.84 GPixel/s versus the Vega 8’s 8.800 GPixel/s, and why its texture rate is 95.36 GTexel/s versus 35.20 GTexel/s. The GRID K2 also leads in raw FP32 throughput: 2.289 TFLOPS versus 1,126.4 GFLOPS. The Vega 8 does support FP16 at 2.253 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the GRID K2 lacks entirely (its FP16 field is null). Clock speeds are less straightforward: the Vega 8 runs at a 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost, while the GRID K2’s core clocks are not recorded in the database, only its memory clock.

Power and physical design diverge sharply. The Vega 8 is an IGP with a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and no slot width (it is integrated into the motherboard). The GRID K2 is a dual-slot card with a 225 W TDP, requiring one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, plus a suggested 550 W power supply. Its length is 267 mm (10.5 inches). The GRID K2 also has no display outputs, marking it as a compute or virtualization card, while the Vega 8’s outputs are motherboard dependent. API support differs slightly: both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the Vega 8 reaches Vulkan 1.3 while the GRID K2 tops out at Vulkan 1.2.175. The DirectX feature level also differs, with the Vega 8 at 12_1 and the GRID K2 at 11_0.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 records an average score of 9221 across all benchmark tests, placing it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA GRID K2 averages 8080, which lands at the 42nd percentile. The Vega 8 leads by roughly 14%.

Q: How do the two compare in the Metal benchmark?

A: The Vega 8 scores 10706 in Geekbench Metal, while the GRID K2 scores 5557. That is a 92.7% advantage for AMD, making the Metal test the largest single gap in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the GRID K2 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the GRID K2 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 10602 versus the Vega 8’s 8822, a 16.8% margin. This offsets AMD’s Metal victory and leaves the head-to-head record tied at one win each.

Q: What memory configurations do the two use?

A: The Vega 8 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. The GRID K2 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256 bit bus with 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The GRID K2 has 1536 shading units, while the Vega 8 has 512. The GRID K2 also has 128 texture mapping units and 32 ROPs, compared to the Vega 8’s 32 TMUs and 8 ROPs.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The Vega 8 is an IGP with a 25 W TDP and no power connectors. The GRID K2 is a dual-slot card with a 225 W TDP, requiring one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 550 W power supply.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The manufacturing process separates them immediately: AMD uses 14 nm at GlobalFoundries, while NVIDIA uses 28 nm at TSMC. Transistor counts follow the process story, with the Vega 8 at 4,940 million and the GRID K2 at 3,540 million. Die size flips the expected order, however, with the GRID K2 larger at 294 mm² versus the Vega 8’s 210 mm². Transistor density consequently favors AMD at 23.5 million per square millimeter versus 12.0 million for NVIDIA.

Clock behavior is another clear split. The Vega 8 has recorded base and boost clocks of 300 MHz and 1100 MHz, respectively. The GRID K2 has no recorded core clocks, but its memory clock is 1250 MHz with a 5 Gbps effective rate. Memory allocation could not be more different: the Vega 8 has no dedicated memory, using system-shared resources with system-dependent bandwidth, while the GRID K2 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus with 160.0 GB/s.

Compute unit counts strongly favor NVIDIA. The GRID K2 has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Vega 8 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This leads to higher pixel and texture rates for the GRID K2: 23.84 GPixel/s and 95.36 GTexel/s, versus 8.800 GPixel/s and 35.20 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput also favors NVIDIA at 2.289 TFLOPS versus 1,126.4 GFLOPS, though the Vega 8 counters with FP16 support at 2.253 TFLOPS, a feature the GRID K2 does not offer.

Power and physical dimensions diverge completely. The Vega 8 draws 25 W and requires no power connectors, while the GRID K2 draws 225 W and needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector. The GRID K2 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length, with a suggested 550 W power supply. The Vega 8 is an IGP with no slot width. Display outputs follow suit: the GRID K2 has no outputs, while the Vega 8’s are motherboard dependent. The bus interface also differs, with the GRID K2 using PCIe 3.0 x16 and the Vega 8 using an IGP connection.

API feature sets show subtle differences. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the Vega 8’s DirectX feature level is 12_1 versus the GRID K2’s 11_0. Vulkan support also differs, with the Vega 8 at 1.3 and the GRID K2 at 1.2.175. Release dates are five years apart, with the Vega 8 launching on February 11, 2018, and the GRID K2 on May 10, 2013. Both are marked end-of-life in the database.

The Verdict

The data points toward a split decision based on workload. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 is the better choice for Metal-based applications. Its 92.7% advantage in the Geekbench Metal test is the single largest margin recorded between these two parts, and its higher average score of 9221 versus 8080 reinforces that it is the stronger overall performer in the database’s aggregate metrics. It also carries the benefits of a modern 14 nm process, a much lower 25 W TDP, and FP16 support, making it suitable for integrated systems where power efficiency and newer API features matter.

The NVIDIA GRID K2, however, remains the pick for OpenCL-heavy compute tasks. Its 16.8% lead in that specific benchmark shows that its 1536 shading units and dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth still deliver real throughput advantages in general-purpose GPU workloads. Its 225 W TDP and dual-slot form factor, along with the requirement for external power connectors and a 550 W power supply, make it a far heavier installation, but one that brings raw compute resources the Vega 8 cannot match. The GRID K2 also has no display outputs, so it is strictly a compute or virtualization card, not a general-purpose graphics solution.

For system builders, the decision hinges on the software environment. If the target applications are Metal-centric or the system needs low power consumption and modern API support, the Vega 8 is the clear winner. If OpenCL performance is the priority and the platform can accommodate a dual-slot, high-power card, the GRID K2 offers superior raw compute throughput. The head-to-head record is tied at one win each, but the magnitude of AMD’s Metal victory, combined with a higher average score overall, gives the Vega 8 the edge in the database’s final assessment.