AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation. Both products sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero for each. This lack of measured comparative results means the analysis must rely entirely on the architectural and specification data provided.

The most decisive numerical gap appears in raw compute throughput. The NVIDIA part delivers 12.35 TFLOPS FP32 performance, while the AMD part delivers 1.638 TFLOPS. That difference is approximately 7.5 times in favor of NVIDIA, a substantial margin that would dominate any FP32-heavy workload. In FP16 compute, the NVIDIA GPU again reaches 12.35 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the AMD GPU reaches 3.277 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The AMD figure is halved when operating at FP32 rates, but even at its peak FP16 output, it trails the NVIDIA part by roughly 3.8 times.

Texture and pixel throughput follow the same pattern. The NVIDIA GPU produces 193.0 GTexel/s and 96.48 GPixel/s. The AMD GPU produces 51.20 GTexel/s and 25.60 GPixel/s. These figures indicate a roughly 3.8 times advantage in texture fill and a roughly 3.8 times advantage in pixel fill for the NVIDIA part. Memory bandwidth also favors NVIDIA at 256.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, a 2.5 times difference. Both use a 128 bit bus, so the bandwidth gap comes from GDDR6 versus LPDDR5 memory technology and different effective memory clocks.

The AMD part does hold advantages in memory capacity and power envelope. It ships with 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory, double the 8 GB of GDDR6 on the NVIDIA card. Its TDP is listed at 15 W, one third of the NVIDIA part's 50 W. These are meaningful distinctions for embedded and portable designs, though they do not offset the compute gap in the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins in memory capacity. Its 16 GB frame buffer is double the NVIDIA part's 8 GB. For workloads that require large datasets resident in video memory, such as certain inference or rendering scenarios, the AMD part has an advantage that raw bandwidth cannot compensate for.

The AMD part also wins in power efficiency at the system level. Its 15 W TDP is significantly lower than 50 W. This makes it suitable for thermally constrained or battery-powered designs where the NVIDIA part would require more cooling and power delivery. The AMD GPU also uses a single USB Type-C display output, which simplifies connectivity in compact form factors.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation wins across every measured performance metric in the database. It has higher clocks (1530 MHz base, 2010 MHz boost versus 1000 MHz base, 1600 MHz boost), more shading units (3072 versus 512), more TMUs (96 versus 32), more ROPs (48 versus 16), more RT cores (24 versus 8), and 96 tensor cores where the AMD part has none listed. Its FP32, FP16, texture, pixel, and memory bandwidth numbers all exceed the AMD part by wide margins.

The NVIDIA part also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD part lists no bus interface. The NVIDIA part has no power connectors and is described as an IGP, meaning it draws power through the motherboard. The AMD part's power connector and slot width are not listed.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture. It is manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC with 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die. Transistor density is 14.7 million per mm². It belongs to the Console GPU generation. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC with 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die. Transistor density is 118.9 million per mm². It belongs to the Ada-MW generation.

The transistor count difference is substantial: 18,900 million versus 2,400 million, a factor of roughly 7.9. Despite similar die sizes (159 mm² versus 163 mm²), the NVIDIA part packs far more transistors due to the denser 5 nm process. This explains the large shading unit, TMU, ROP, RT core, and tensor core counts on the NVIDIA side.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 at 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective speed, yielding 102.4 GB/s over a 128 bit bus. The NVIDIA part uses 8 GB of GDDR6 at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, yielding 256.0 GB/s over the same 128 bit bus. The NVIDIA part's memory clock is more than double the AMD part's effective speed.

Ray tracing hardware exists on both but differs in scale. The AMD part has 8 RT cores. The NVIDIA part has 24 RT cores. Tensor cores are present only on the NVIDIA part, with 96 units. The AMD part lists no tensor cores. This indicates the NVIDIA part supports AI-accelerated workloads that the AMD part cannot accelerate in hardware.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor listed as Ampere-MW and a successor as Blackwell-MW. The AMD part has no predecessor or successor listed. The NVIDIA part was released on 2024-12-31 (the JSON shows the AMD release date as 2024-12-31T17:00:00.000Z, which is January 1, 2025 in UTC; the NVIDIA release date is 2023-03-20T17:00:00.000Z, which is March 21, 2023 in UTC). Both are marked as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data indicates two very different products aimed at different segments. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation is the clear performance leader across every measured metric in the database. Its FP32 compute is 7.5 times higher, its texture rate is 3.8 times higher, its pixel rate is 3.8 times higher, and its memory bandwidth is 2.5 times higher. It also has 6 times the shading units, 3 times the TMUs, 3 times the ROPs, 3 times the RT cores, and 96 tensor cores versus none.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins on memory capacity and power draw. At 16 GB, it offers double the memory of the NVIDIA part. At 15 W, it uses one third the power. These factors make it viable for low-power embedded systems, handheld consoles, or other designs where the 50 W TDP of the NVIDIA part would be prohibitive.

The specification differences point to distinct use cases. The NVIDIA part's tensor cores and higher RT core count make it suitable for AI inference, ray-traced graphics, and compute-heavy workloads. The AMD part's larger memory and lower power make it suitable for applications that prioritize capacity and thermal headroom over raw throughput.

There are no head-to-head benchmark scores in the database, so the verdict rests on the recorded specifications. The NVIDIA part delivers performance that the AMD part cannot match, but the AMD part delivers capacity and efficiency that the NVIDIA part does not offer. Neither product is a direct substitute for the other.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation delivers 12.35 TFLOPS FP32, which is about 7.5 times the 1.638 TFLOPS of the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is rated at 15 W. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation is rated at 50 W.

Q: Does either GPU support tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has tensor cores, with 96 units. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU lists no tensor cores.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU provides 102.4 GB/s. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation provides 256.0 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has more RT cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation has 24 RT cores. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 8 RT cores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU | NVIDIA RTX 2000 Embedded Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | 18,900 million |

| Die size | 163 mm² | 159 mm² |

| Transistor density | 14.7M / mm² | 118.9M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1000 MHz | 1530 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1600 MHz | 2010 MHz |

| Memory size | 16 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory type | LPDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory clock | 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz 16 Gbps effective |

| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 512 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 32 | 96 |

| ROPs | 16 | 48 |

| RT cores | 8 | 24 |

| Tensor cores | None | 96 |

| Pixel rate | 25.60 GPixel/s | 96.48 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 51.20 GTexel/s | 193.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.638 TFLOPS | 12.35 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) | 12.35 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 50 W |

| Slot width | Not listed | IGP |

| Power connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus interface | Not listed | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release date | 2024-12-31 (UTC) | 2023-03-20 (UTC) |

| Predecessor | None | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | None | Blackwell-MW |