AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently lists no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU, and neither part has recorded average benchmark scores. However, the raw compute specifications alone provide a strong basis for comparison. The Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is approximately 5.06 times the 1.638 TFLOPS of the Ryzen Z2 A GPU. That is a massive gap in raw shader throughput, driven by a boost clock of 2700 MHz versus 1600 MHz, as well as a higher shader unit count.

The texture rate tells a similar story. The Ryzen Z2 GPU reaches 129.6 GTexel/s, while the Ryzen Z2 A GPU manages 51.20 GTexel/s. That places the newer part at roughly 2.53 times the texel throughput of the older one. Pixel rate is even more lopsided: 86.40 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s, a 3.375 times advantage for the Ryzen Z2 GPU. These figures indicate that in any rasterization-heavy workload, the Ryzen Z2 GPU should pull far ahead, assuming the rest of the system can feed it.

The FP16 comparison is interesting due to architectural differences. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU computes 3.277 TFLOPS FP16 using a 2:1 rate, meaning it halves throughput relative to FP32. The Ryzen Z2 GPU computes 8.294 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 rate, matching its FP32 output. So in FP16 workloads, the Ryzen Z2 GPU is not just ahead, it is ahead by a factor of 2.53 (8.294 divided by 3.277). For applications that rely on half-precision math, the newer architecture has a distinct advantage.

Ray tracing hardware also differs. The Ryzen Z2 GPU packs 12 RT cores, while the Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 8. That is a 50% increase in RT core count. Combined with the much higher clock speed and shader count, ray-traced scenes should see an even larger performance delta than rasterized ones, though the database does not provide direct RT benchmark numbers.

Memory bandwidth is another clear win for the Ryzen Z2 GPU. It uses LPDDR5X memory at 7.5 Gbps effective, yielding 119.9 GB/s across a 128-bit bus. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses LPDDR5 at 6.4 Gbps effective, yielding 102.4 GB/s on the same bus width. That is a 17.5 GB/s difference, or about 17.1% more bandwidth for the newer part. While not as dramatic as the compute gains, it still matters for memory-heavy workloads like large textures or physics simulations.

Neither part has recorded wins in the head-to-head benchmark section, as both entries show empty arrays and zero wins. This means the analysis must rely on specification-derived expectations rather than measured results. The percentileVsAllGpus field lists both at 50, indicating they sit at the median of all GPUs in the database, but that is a static percentile with no benchmark scores behind it.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU has a boost clock of 2700 MHz, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU boosts to 1600 MHz. The newer part runs 1100 MHz higher at peak.

Q: How much faster is the Ryzen Z2 GPU in FP32 compute?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS FP32, which is 5.06 times the 1.638 TFLOPS of the Ryzen Z2 A GPU.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both have 16 GB of memory. However, the Ryzen Z2 GPU uses LPDDR5X with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses LPDDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Ryzen Z2 A GPU is built on a 7 nm process, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU uses a 4 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The newer part packs over 10 times more transistors into a slightly larger area.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture units?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU has 768 shading units and 48 TMUs, compared to 512 shading units and 32 TMUs on the Ryzen Z2 A GPU. It also has 32 ROPs versus 16 ROPs.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in nearly every measurable specification category. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 output is over five times the FP32 of the Ryzen Z2 A GPU. It also leads in texture rate (129.6 GTexel/s versus 51.20 GTexel/s), pixel rate (86.40 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s), and memory bandwidth (119.9 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s). For any workload that stresses raw graphics throughput, ray tracing, or high-resolution rendering, the Ryzen Z2 GPU is the clear choice based on the data.

The Ryzen Z2 A GPU does have one advantage: power consumption. Its TDP is 15 W, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has a TDP of 28 W. That means the older part consumes less power per frame, though the database does not provide efficiency metrics. For a low-power handheld or embedded design where wattage is the limiting factor, the Ryzen Z2 A GPU could be preferable despite its lower performance. It also has a lower base clock (1000 MHz versus 800 MHz), but that is irrelevant given the boost clock gap.

The Ryzen Z2 A GPU might also be easier to integrate thermally. Its 2,400 million transistors on a 7 nm process generate less heat than the 25,390 million transistor part on 4 nm, assuming similar efficiency. But the database does not provide thermal measurements, so this is an inference from TDP and transistor counts.

In FP16 workloads, both parts behave differently. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU halves its throughput to 3.277 TFLOPS, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU maintains full rate at 8.294 TFLOPS. So for machine learning inference or other half-precision tasks, the Ryzen Z2 GPU is disproportionately faster than the FP32 gap alone would suggest.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification field. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses a Van Gogh chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process. The Ryzen Z2 GPU uses a Hawk Point chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts are 2,400 million versus 25,390 million, a difference of 22,990 million. Die size is 163 mm² versus 178 mm², with transistor density of 14.7M per mm² versus 142.6M per mm².

Clock speeds diverge significantly. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU runs at 1000 MHz base and 1600 MHz boost. The Ryzen Z2 GPU runs at 800 MHz base and 2700 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective for the older part, versus 937 MHz with 7.5 Gbps effective for the newer one.

Memory type is LPDDR5 on the Ryzen Z2 A GPU and LPDDR5X on the Ryzen Z2 GPU. Both have 16 GB capacity and a 128-bit bus, but bandwidth differs by 17.5 GB/s. Shading units are 512 versus 768, TMUs are 32 versus 48, ROPs are 16 versus 32, and RT cores are 8 versus 12.

Pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s, texture rate is 51.20 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 1.638 TFLOPS versus 8.294 TFLOPS. FP16 is 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP is 15 W versus 28 W.

The display outputs are identical: both have 1x USB Type-C. API support is also identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither part has a launch MSRP listed in the database.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU is built on RDNA 2.0, AMD's previous generation graphics architecture, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU uses RDNA 3.0. This generational leap explains much of the performance difference beyond raw clock speeds.

The process node shrinks from 7 nm to 4 nm, both from TSMC. This allows the Ryzen Z2 GPU to pack 25,390 million transistors into a 178 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 142.6M per mm². The Ryzen Z2 A GPU has just 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, giving a density of 14.7M per mm². The density difference is nearly 10-fold, which indicates a much more modern design with tighter integration.

The FP16 implementation differs fundamentally. RDNA 2.0 on the Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses a 2:1 rate, meaning FP16 throughput is half of FP32. RDNA 3.0 on the Ryzen Z2 GPU achieves a 1:1 rate, matching FP32 throughput. This is a key architectural improvement that makes the newer part more efficient for half-precision compute.

The RT core count increases from 8 to 12, a 50% increase. Combined with the higher boost clock, ray tracing performance should be disproportionately better on the Ryzen Z2 GPU. The ROP count doubles from 16 to 32, which directly impacts pixel fill rate and rasterization at high resolutions.

Memory technology advances from LPDDR5 to LPDDR5X. The effective speed rises from 6.4 Gbps to 7.5 Gbps, improving bandwidth from 102.4 GB/s to 119.9 GB/s. This is a modest but real improvement that helps feed the larger shader arrays.

The TDP difference of 15 W versus 28 W reflects both the process shrink and the performance target. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU is designed for lower power envelopes, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU trades power for significantly higher throughput. The base clock is actually lower on the newer part (800 MHz versus 1000 MHz), but the boost clock is much higher, indicating a wider dynamic range.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU for any performance-oriented application. Its 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 output is over five times that of the Ryzen Z2 A GPU, and it leads in every compute metric: texture rate, pixel rate, FP16 throughput, RT core count, and memory bandwidth. The 119.9 GB/s bandwidth, 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate, and 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate make it the superior choice for gaming, rendering, or compute workloads.

The Ryzen Z2 A GPU retains one meaningful advantage: its 15 W TDP versus 28 W for the Ryzen Z2 GPU. For systems where power draw is the primary constraint, such as fanless handhelds or battery-critical designs, the older part offers a lower power footprint. Its 512 shading units and 32 TMUs are still functional for light workloads, and its 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p-class gaming.

However, the specification gap is so large that the Ryzen Z2 GPU is the obvious pick for most users. The newer architecture, higher clock speed, and doubled ROP count deliver a level of performance that the Ryzen Z2 A GPU cannot approach. The 4 nm process and 142.6M per mm² transistor density also suggest better efficiency per transistor, even though total power is higher.

The database shows both parts with a 50th percentile ranking across all GPUs, but that ranking is not backed by benchmark scores. The recorded specifications indicate that the Ryzen Z2 GPU should rank far higher in real-world tests. The Ryzen Z2 A GPU is a capable low-power option, but the Ryzen Z2 GPU is the stronger product on every performance-critical specification. For anyone choosing between the two, the data points squarely to the Ryzen Z2 GPU unless power consumption is the overriding factor.