AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural identities of the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between these two GPUs?

A: The AMD part features 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD GPU has more capacity, while the NVIDIA GPU has higher bandwidth.

Q: What are the respective power targets for these GPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 35 W. The NVIDIA part is rated for more than double the power draw.

Q: Which GPU has a higher shading unit count and what does that imply?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has 2,560 shading units, compared to 512 shading units on the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU. This fivefold difference in shading units aligns with the NVIDIA part's higher FP32 throughput of 10.37 TFLOPS versus 1.638 TFLOPS for the AMD part.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The NVIDIA AD107 chip packs 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die, yielding a density of 118.9M transistors per mm². The AMD Van Gogh chip contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, resulting in a density of 14.7M transistors per mm². The NVIDIA chip uses a more advanced 5 nm process and achieves substantially higher density.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API feature levels?

A: Yes, both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so they are aligned on modern API compatibility.

The Verdict

The recorded data positions these two GPUs in very different performance tiers despite both being classified as active products. The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation shows a dominant advantage in raw compute throughput, with FP32 performance of 10.37 TFLOPS compared to the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU's 1.638 TFLOPS. That is a 6.3x gap in favor of the NVIDIA part. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 162.0 GTexel/s versus 51.20 GTexel/s. Pixel rate also favors NVIDIA decisively at 97.20 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s.

The AMD part counters with a memory capacity advantage: 16 GB versus 6 GB. For workloads that require large frame buffers, such as high-resolution texture sets or certain compute tasks, the AMD GPU offers more headroom. However, the NVIDIA part delivers nearly double the memory bandwidth (192.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s), which is often the more critical factor for sustained rendering performance.

The power envelope is also distinct. The AMD GPU operates at 15 W, making it suited for very low-power embedded or portable applications. The NVIDIA GPU at 35 W requires more power but delivers substantially higher peak throughput. The NVIDIA part also includes dedicated hardware features that the AMD part lacks, specifically 80 tensor cores and 20 RT cores, which enable accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The AMD RDNA 2.0 part has 8 RT cores but no tensor cores.

For buyers prioritizing maximum compute and rendering performance, the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is the clear choice according to the benchmark data. For buyers prioritizing low power consumption with a large memory pool, the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU offers a viable alternative, though with significantly lower raw throughput. The data does not support any scenario where the AMD part outperforms the NVIDIA part in standard GPU benchmarks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database shows no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of 0. The percentileVsAllGpus field is identical for both at 50, meaning neither has been ranked against the broader GPU landscape in the current dataset. The winsA and winsB counters are both zero, reflecting the absence of direct comparative tests.

Without direct benchmark scores, the specification data provides the only measurable comparison. The FP32 throughput figures are the most telling: the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 10.37 TFLOPS, which is 6.33 times the 1.638 TFLOPS of the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU. The FP16 figures show a different ratio: the NVIDIA part delivers 10.37 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the AMD part delivers 3.277 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. This means the AMD GPU's FP16 performance is 31.6% of the NVIDIA part's FP16 output.

Texture rate comparisons are equally lopsided. The NVIDIA GPU processes 162.0 GTexel/s, which is 3.16 times the AMD GPU's 51.20 GTexel/s. Pixel rate shows a 3.8x gap, with NVIDIA at 97.20 GPixel/s versus AMD at 25.60 GPixel/s. These figures indicate that the NVIDIA part is substantially faster in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

Memory bandwidth is the one specification where the NVIDIA part does not dominate by a wide margin, but it still leads: 192.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, a 1.875x advantage. The AMD part's larger 16 GB frame buffer versus 6 GB does provide a capacity advantage, but the lower bandwidth limits how effectively that capacity can be utilized in bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Clock speeds also favor the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 2025 MHz, while the AMD GPU has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The NVIDIA boost clock is 26.6% higher, and its base clock is 48.5% higher. The memory clock is also higher on the NVIDIA part: 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer rate versus 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective on the AMD part.

The shading unit count difference (2,560 versus 512) and TMU count difference (80 versus 32) both align with the compute throughput gaps. The ROP count is 48 on the NVIDIA part versus 16 on the AMD part, which explains the pixel rate disparity. These structural differences confirm that the NVIDIA part is designed for a much higher performance tier.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation uses a 5 nm process node, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses a 7 nm node, both at TSMC. The NVIDIA chip contains 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, while the AMD chip contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die. The transistor density is 118.9M per mm² for NVIDIA versus 14.7M per mm² for AMD.

Memory configuration differs fundamentally. The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) on the AMD part versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on the NVIDIA part.

The core configuration shows a large disparity: AMD has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while NVIDIA has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The RT core count is 8 on the AMD part versus 20 on the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA part also includes 80 tensor cores, while the AMD part has none listed.

Clock speeds differ: AMD base clock is 1000 MHz and boost is 1600 MHz; NVIDIA base clock is 1485 MHz and boost is 2025 MHz. The TDP is 15 W for AMD and 35 W for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part is classified as an IGP with no power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the AMD part lists no slot width, power connectors, or bus interface in the database.

Display outputs also differ: the AMD part lists 1x USB Type-C, while the NVIDIA part lists "Portable Device Dependent." The release dates are different, with the AMD part dated 2024-12-31 and the NVIDIA part dated 2024-02-25. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor (Ampere-MW) and successor (Blackwell-MW) listed, while the AMD part has neither. The NVIDIA part belongs to the GeForce 10-series and the Ada-MW (x000A) generation, while the AMD part is categorized as Console GPU (AMD).

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is fundamental. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is built on RDNA 2.0, a graphics-focused architecture that emphasizes efficiency per watt. The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is built on Ada Lovelace, NVIDIA's latest-generation architecture that integrates dedicated tensor cores for AI workloads and RT cores for ray tracing.

The process node difference is significant: the NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process, while the AMD part uses 7 nm. This contributes to the transistor density gap (118.9M per mm² versus 14.7M per mm²) and enables the NVIDIA chip to pack nearly eight times more transistors into a slightly smaller die.

The memory architecture differs in type and configuration. AMD uses LPDDR5, a low-power memory typically found in portable and embedded systems. NVIDIA uses GDDR6, a higher-bandwidth memory designed for discrete GPU workloads. The bus width is wider on the AMD part (128 bit versus 96 bit), but the effective transfer rate is much higher on the NVIDIA part (16 Gbps versus 6.4 Gbps), resulting in higher total bandwidth.

The compute architecture is where the largest divergence appears. The NVIDIA part has 2,560 shading units, which is exactly five times the AMD part's 512 shading units. The TMU count (80 versus 32) and ROP count (48 versus 16) follow similar multipliers. The NVIDIA part also has 80 tensor cores, which are absent from the AMD part. This means the NVIDIA part can accelerate matrix operations for AI inference and training, while the AMD part has no such dedicated hardware.

Ray tracing support exists on both parts but at different scales. The AMD part has 8 RT cores, while the NVIDIA part has 20 RT cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), so the API-level ray tracing feature set is identical, but the hardware throughput differs substantially.

The FP16 processing mode also differs. The AMD part processes FP16 at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, meaning it can theoretically double its throughput when using packed half-precision operations. The NVIDIA part processes FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 and FP32 throughput are identical. This is an architectural choice: the NVIDIA part does not use the packed-FP16 path that some other architectures employ, but its raw FP32 throughput is so high that FP16 performance still exceeds the AMD part's packed FP16 output.

The power delivery architecture differs as well. The AMD part has a 15 W TDP, consistent with its RDNA 2.0 efficiency focus and LPDDR5 memory. The NVIDIA part has a 35 W TDP and is classified as an IGP with no power connectors, indicating it is designed to be soldered onto a motherboard and powered through the system's main power delivery. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the NVIDIA part, while no bus interface is listed for the AMD part.

The production status for both is active, but their release timelines differ. The NVIDIA part was released earlier in 2024, while the AMD part is dated later in the same year. The NVIDIA part's successor, Blackwell-MW, is already listed, which suggests the Ada-MW generation is nearing its end of the product cycle, while the AMD part has no successor listed.