AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition vs NVIDIA CMP 50HX Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition, with an average benchmark score of 73370, compared to 51790 for the NVIDIA CMP 50HX. The AMD card sits at the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA card is at the 86th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL workloads?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD card scores 76111 versus 56135 for the NVIDIA card, a lead of 35.6%. This is the smaller of the two head-to-head gaps, but it is still substantial.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card win any benchmark comparison?

A: No. Across the two recorded head-to-head tests, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition wins both. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX has zero wins in the database's comparative set.

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

A: The AMD card has 16 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, while the NVIDIA card has 10 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 320-bit bus. Despite the smaller bus, the NVIDIA card has higher peak bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition boosts to 1600 MHz, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX boosts to 1545 MHz. The AMD base clock is also higher at 1382 MHz versus 1350 MHz.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, giving it a more modern API feature set.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is built on the Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The die contains 12,500 million transistors across a 495 mm² area, yielding a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The NVIDIA CMP 50HX, in contrast, uses the TU102 chip with the Turing architecture, produced on TSMC's 12 nm process. It packs 18,600 million transistors into a larger 754 mm² die, with a slightly lower transistor density of 24.7M per mm².

The functional unit breakdown reveals a different design philosophy. AMD's card fields 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA's card has 3584 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The NVIDIA card also includes 56 ray tracing cores and 448 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the AMD card. This means the CMP 50HX has hardware dedicated to ray tracing and tensor operations, while the Vega Frontier Edition relies purely on its GCN compute units.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The AMD card uses 16 GB of HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus, achieving 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 10 GB of GDDR6 across a 320-bit bus, and despite the narrower bus, it reaches 560.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock rates tell the story: AMD runs at 945 MHz with 1890 Mbps effective, while NVIDIA runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

The bus interface also differs. The AMD card uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 1.0 x4, a legacy interface that severely limits host communication. Display outputs differ as well: AMD provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while NVIDIA provides no outputs at all, reflecting its mining-specific design. The NVIDIA card is wider at 35 mm versus AMD's unspecified width, though both share the same 267 mm length.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. In Geekbench OpenCL, AMD scores 76111 against NVIDIA's 56135, a 35.6% advantage. This is a significant margin in compute-oriented workloads, where the AMD card's higher shading unit count and larger memory pool contribute to its performance.

The Vulkan result is even more lopsided. AMD scores 71937, while NVIDIA manages 47445, giving AMD a 51.6% lead. This suggests that in Vulkan-based applications, the Vega Frontier Edition delivers more than one and a half times the performance of the CMP 50HX. The gap likely stems from the AMD card's higher clock speeds and broader memory bus, though the NVIDIA card's newer architecture does not translate into a win here.

Across both head-to-head tests, AMD wins 2 and NVIDIA wins 0. The average benchmark scores reinforce this: AMD at 73370 versus NVIDIA at 51790. The nearest rivals for AMD include the Radeon Pro Vega 64 at 72379 (1.4% behind) and the TITAN X Pascal at 72098 (1.8% behind). For NVIDIA, the closest competitor is the Radeon RX 6900 XT at 50951 (1.6% behind), followed by the Radeon RX Vega 64 at 50001 (3.6% behind). These rival comparisons show that AMD's card sits comfortably ahead of its own nearest competitors, while NVIDIA's card is only marginally above the next-fastest GPUs.

The percentile rankings place AMD at the 91st percentile of all GPUs and NVIDIA at the 86th percentile. While both are above average, the five-percentile gap translates into a meaningful difference in real-world performance across the benchmark suite.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge across nearly every measurable specification. The process node differs: AMD uses 14 nm, NVIDIA uses 12 nm. The foundry differs as well: GlobalFoundries for AMD, TSMC for NVIDIA. Transistor counts are 12,500 million versus 18,600 million, and die sizes are 495 mm² versus 754 mm².

Clock speeds favor AMD on both base and boost: 1382 MHz versus 1350 MHz base, and 1600 MHz versus 1545 MHz boost. Memory sizes are 16 GB versus 10 GB, with types of HBM2 versus GDDR6. The bus widths are 2048 bit versus 320 bit. Bandwidth, however, favors NVIDIA: 560.0 GB/s versus 483.8 GB/s.

Compute unit counts favor AMD for shading units (4096 versus 3584) and TMUs (256 versus 192), but NVIDIA has more ROPs (80 versus 64). The NVIDIA card uniquely has 56 RT cores and 448 tensor cores, while AMD has none. Pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 123.6 GPixel/s versus 102.4 GPixel/s, but texture rate favors AMD at 409.6 GTexel/s versus 296.6 GTexel/s.

FP32 compute is higher on AMD at 13.11 TFLOPS versus 11.07 TFLOPS. FP16 follows the same pattern: 26.21 TFLOPS versus 22.15 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio. Power draw differs: AMD has a 300 W TDP, NVIDIA has 250 W. The suggested PSU is 700 W for AMD and 600 W for NVIDIA. Both use dual-slot coolers and 2x 8-pin power connectors.

Bus interfaces differ significantly: PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD, PCIe 1.0 x4 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are present on AMD (1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a) and absent on NVIDIA. API support differs in DirectX version (12_1 versus 12 Ultimate 12_2) and Vulkan version (1.3 versus 1.4). Physical dimensions show the same 267 mm length, but heights differ slightly at 111 mm versus 116 mm, and NVIDIA specifies a width of 35 mm while AMD does not.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition for general compute performance. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, with margins of 35.6% in OpenCL and 51.6% in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 73370 places it at the 91st percentile, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX sits at the 86th percentile with an average of 51790. For any workload measured in these tests, the AMD card is the stronger choice.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX does have advantages in raw specifications that do not translate into benchmark wins. It has higher memory bandwidth at 560.0 GB/s, more ROPs, and dedicated RT and tensor cores. It also draws less power at 250 W versus 300 W and requires a smaller PSU at 600 W versus 700 W. However, none of these advantages overcome the substantial performance deficit in the recorded tests.

The PCIe 1.0 x4 interface on the NVIDIA card is a notable limitation. It restricts data transfer between the GPU and host system, which likely contributes to its lower benchmark scores despite competitive memory bandwidth. The lack of display outputs also limits its use to compute or mining scenarios, whereas the AMD card can serve as a workstation GPU with full display connectivity.

For users prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition is the clear winner based on the recorded data. The NVIDIA card's higher memory bandwidth and modern API support do not offset the 40%+ average benchmark gap.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition wins in OpenCL compute tasks. Its 76111 OpenCL score versus 56135 for NVIDIA represents a 35.6% lead, making it the better choice for applications that leverage this API. It also dominates Vulkan workloads, with a 51.6% advantage, indicating strong performance in Vulkan-based games or compute applications.

The AMD card's higher FP32 throughput (13.11 TFLOPS versus 11.07 TFLOPS) and larger memory capacity (16 GB versus 10 GB) suggest it is better suited for memory-intensive compute tasks. Its 2048-bit bus, while lower in peak bandwidth, provides more memory channels for parallel access patterns common in scientific computing.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX wins in specific technical areas even if it loses overall. Its 560.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is 15.8% higher than AMD's 483.8 GB/s, which could benefit bandwidth-bound operations. The 56 RT cores and 448 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor workloads, though no benchmark data in the database measures these capabilities directly.

NVIDIA's card also has a lower TDP at 250 W versus 300 W, meaning it requires less power and a smaller PSU (600 W versus 700 W). Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility offer a more modern API feature set, though this does not translate into a win in the recorded Vulkan test.

For pixel-rate-bound workloads, NVIDIA's 123.6 GPixel/s exceeds AMD's 102.4 GPixel/s, giving it an edge in fill-rate-limited scenarios. The NVIDIA card also has more ROPs (80 versus 64), which supports this advantage.

In summary, the AMD card wins in compute benchmarks and general performance, while the NVIDIA card offers higher memory bandwidth, lower power draw, and specialized hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations. The database records show AMD winning both head-to-head tests, so the practical recommendation is clear: for measured performance, choose AMD.