AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip based on RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 7 nm process with 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The transistor density differs substantially: 14.7M per mm² for AMD versus 121.8M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA's configuration delivers roughly 3.5 times the memory bandwidth of AMD's part.

Q: What are the recorded benchmark results for the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation?

A: The database shows a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146,593 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 123,842. The average benchmark score across tests is 135,218, placing the card in the 95th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU?

A: The database records no benchmark entries for the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU. Its average benchmark score is 0, and it sits in the 50th percentile of all GPUs based on the recorded data.

Q: How does the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The nearest rival is the NVIDIA A10M with an average score of 135,230, showing a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135,774 (0.4% behind), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136,472 (0.9% behind). The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is effectively at parity with these cards.

Q: What are the power and physical specifications of each card?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a 15 W TDP and a single USB Type-C display output. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has a 130 W TDP, requires a 300 W suggested PSU, uses a single 16-pin power connector, is single-slot, and offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is a Console GPU generation part built around power efficiency, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a Workstation Ada part oriented toward maximum compute throughput.

The process technology gap is significant. AMD uses TSMC's 7 nm node with 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 14.7M per mm². NVIDIA uses TSMC's 5 nm node with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, achieving 121.8M per mm². This is an 8.3-fold difference in transistor density and a 14.9-fold difference in raw transistor count.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. It also includes 8 ray tracing cores but no tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. NVIDIA's shading unit count is 12 times higher, its TMU count is 6 times higher, and its ROP count is 4 times higher.

Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA. The AMD GPU has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The NVIDIA GPU has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2175 MHz. Combined with the larger compute array, this produces a substantial throughput advantage for NVIDIA.

The memory architecture reflects the different target workloads. AMD uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), yielding 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), yielding 360.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA's memory bandwidth is 3.5 times higher.

The feature sets diverge in compute capability. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. However, NVIDIA adds 192 tensor cores, which AMD's part lacks entirely. The ray tracing implementation also differs, with NVIDIA providing 48 RT cores versus AMD's 8.

The physical design is equally distinct. AMD's TDP is 15 W, making it suitable for compact, low-power systems with a single USB Type-C output. NVIDIA's TDP is 130 W, requires a 300 W suggested PSU, uses a single 16-pin connector, occupies a single slot, and measures 245 mm in length and 112 mm in height. NVIDIA provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation. The wins counter shows zero for both sides. However, the available data allows for meaningful comparison through the NVIDIA card's recorded scores and the AMD card's absence of scores.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146,593 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 123,842. Its average benchmark score is 135,218, which places it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has no recorded benchmarks, an average score of 0, and sits in the 50th percentile. The percentile gap of 45 points indicates the NVIDIA card is positioned far higher in the overall performance distribution.

The NVIDIA card's nearest rivals provide context for its standing. The NVIDIA A10M scores 135,230, a 0% delta, meaning the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is essentially tied with it. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135,396, which is 0.1% behind the RTX 4000 Ada Generation. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135,774, 0.4% behind. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136,472, 0.9% behind. These narrow deltas show that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation sits in a tightly clustered group of professional GPUs, all within roughly 1% of each other.

The compute throughput figures reinforce the separation between the two cards. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU delivers 1.638 TFLOPS FP32, 3.277 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), a pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 51.20 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation delivers 26.73 TFLOPS FP32, 26.73 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio), a pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 417.6 GTexel/s. NVIDIA's FP32 throughput is 16.3 times higher, its pixel rate is 5.4 times higher, and its texture rate is 8.2 times higher.

The FP16 comparison is particularly stark. AMD achieves 3.277 TFLOPS FP16 using a 2:1 ratio, meaning it halves the rate relative to FP32. NVIDIA achieves 26.73 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it maintains the same rate as FP32. The resulting gap is 8.2-fold in favor of NVIDIA.

Memory bandwidth differences amplify the compute gap. AMD's 102.4 GB/s bandwidth will constrain data movement for any workload that exceeds the LPDDR5 subsystem's capacity. NVIDIA's 360.0 GB/s bandwidth provides 3.5 times the headroom, which matters for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and compute workloads that stream data through the GPU.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear separation in performance class. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 135,218. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU sits in the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmark scores. Any user requiring the compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or professional feature set of the NVIDIA card should select it based on the recorded data.

The NVIDIA card delivers 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 and 26.73 TFLOPS FP16, compared to 1.638 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.277 TFLOPS FP16 for AMD. The NVIDIA card has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth, compared to 16 GB of LPDDR5 with 102.4 GB/s for AMD. The NVIDIA card also provides 192 tensor cores, which AMD lacks entirely, and 48 RT cores versus AMD's 8.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a 15 W TDP, which is 115 W lower than the NVIDIA card's 130 W TDP. For systems where power consumption is the primary constraint, the AMD part is the only viable option based on the power figures in the database. The AMD card also uses a single USB Type-C output, which may suit compact designs, while NVIDIA requires a 16-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

The production status of both cards is Active, meaning both are currently available. The NVIDIA card was released earlier, with its release date recorded as 2023-08-08, while AMD's release date is 2024-12-31. NVIDIA's predecessor is Workstation Ampere, and its successor is Blackwell PRO W, indicating an established product line. AMD lists no predecessor or successor.

For professional workloads, scientific computing, or any task that demands high FP32 throughput, tensor operations, or large memory bandwidth, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the clear choice. Its benchmark scores confirm this. For ultra-low-power embedded or console-class applications where 15 W is the maximum allowable power draw, the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU fits that constraint. The data does not support any other conclusion.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU | NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation |

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

| Chip | Van Gogh | AD104 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Generation | Console GPU (AMD) | Workstation Ada |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 2,400 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 14.7M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1600 MHz | 2175 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 20 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 360.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 6,144 |

| TMUs | 32 | 192 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 192 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.60 GPixel/s | 139.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 51.20 GTexel/s | 417.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.638 TFLOPS | 26.73 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.277 TFLOPS (2:1) | 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | Not specified | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Length | Not specified | 245 mm (9.6 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 112 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2023-08-08 |

| Predecessor | None | Workstation Ampere |

| Successor | None | Blackwell PRO W |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 95 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 135,218 |