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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. However, the database does provide substantial performance context for the NVIDIA part, while the AMD part has no benchmark entries at all.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation posts an average benchmark score of 117,088 across its recorded tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 124,812, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 109,364. These figures place the card at the 95th percentile among all GPUs tracked in the database, indicating that it outperforms roughly 95 percent of the graphics cards on record.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU, by contrast, has no benchmark scores listed and sits at the 50th percentile, which is the median position. This means the database has no measured performance data for the AMD part, and its percentile rank is a default placeholder rather than a derived statistic.

When comparing the NVIDIA card to its nearest rivals, the data shows a tight cluster of results. The NVIDIA GB10 averages 117,393, which is 0.3 percent higher than the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation's average. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 scores 118,976, putting it 1.6 percent ahead. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB averages 114,395, which is 2.4 percent behind. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113,944, trailing by 2.8 percent.

These delta percentages reveal that the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits in a competitive band where the leading rival, the Radeon PRO W7700, is less than two percentage points faster. The margin between the fastest and slowest of these four rivals spans only 5.6 percent, suggesting that the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is positioned within a closely matched performance tier.

The raw compute specifications reinforce the NVIDIA part's advantage. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and an identical 19.17 TFLOPS of FP16 performance with a 1:1 ratio. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU provides 1.638 TFLOPS of FP32 and 3.277 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA card's FP32 throughput is approximately 11.7 times higher, though this figure is derived from the listed specs rather than a direct benchmark comparison.

Pixel and texture rates tell a similar story. The NVIDIA card achieves 99.84 GPixel/s and 299.5 GTexel/s. The AMD part reaches 25.60 GPixel/s and 51.20 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth differs substantially as well: the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 280.0 GB/s from its 20 GB GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, while the Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 102.4 GB/s from 16 GB LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points decisively toward the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation as the higher-performing product. Its 95th percentile ranking, combined with an average benchmark score of 117,088, places it firmly in the upper tier of the database. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has no recorded benchmark scores, leaving its 50th percentile as a default value with no measured backing.

For workloads that rely on raw compute throughput, the NVIDIA card's specifications indicate a clear advantage. Its 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units dwarf the AMD part's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA card also features 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, whereas the AMD part lists 8 RT cores and no tensor cores.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is a workstation-class product, as its generation label indicates, and its predecessor is Workstation Ampere with a successor in Blackwell PRO W. This positioning suggests it is designed for professional compute tasks. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU is labeled as a Console GPU, indicating a different target application, likely embedded or handheld systems where power efficiency takes priority over peak performance.

The database shows that the NVIDIA card's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, outscores it by 1.6 percent. This narrow margin matters for buyers comparing workstation cards, but the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation still holds its own within that group. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU does not appear in any rival clusters, reinforcing that it competes in a different segment.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU uses the Van Gogh chip based on RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process.

Transistor counts differ by an order of magnitude. The AMD chip contains 2,400 million transistors on a 163 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 14.7 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip packs 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, achieving 121.8 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA part's density is roughly 8.3 times higher, reflecting the denser 5 nm process and a larger absolute transistor budget.

Clock behavior also diverges. The AMD part has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz, with memory running at 800 MHz or 6.4 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA card has a lower base clock of 720 MHz but a boost clock of 1560 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz or 14 Gbps effective. Despite the lower base clock, the NVIDIA card's much larger shader count produces far higher throughput.

Memory configurations reflect different design goals. The AMD GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 102.4 GB/s. The NVIDIA card uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, achieving 280.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA part's bandwidth is 2.7 times higher, and its capacity is 25 percent larger.

Physical and interface differences are significant. The NVIDIA card is a dual-slot design measuring 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It draws 70 W and requires no external power connectors, drawing power entirely from the slot. It outputs video through 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The AMD part draws 15 W and has a single USB Type-C display output. Its slot width, power connectors, and bus interface are not listed.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The NVIDIA card's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 19.17 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the AMD part halves its FP16 rate to 3.277 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, indicating that the NVIDIA architecture handles half-precision workloads with no penalty.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 117,088 across its recorded tests. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has no recorded benchmark scores.

Q: How does the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700?

A: The Radeon PRO W7700 averages 118,976, which is 1.6 percent higher than the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation's 117,088. The NVIDIA card trails this rival by a narrow margin.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power draws of each GPU?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has a TDP of 15 W. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU rating of 250 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units. The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU has 512 shading units.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its FP32 throughput of 19.17 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 19.17 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio give it a substantial lead in any workload that scales with shader count or half-precision math. The 192 texture mapping units and 64 ROPs enable higher texture and pixel throughput, with 299.5 GTexel/s and 99.84 GPixel/s respectively, which benefits high-resolution rendering and texture-heavy scenes.

The NVIDIA card also wins in memory bandwidth and capacity. With 280.0 GB/s and 20 GB of GDDR6, it can handle larger datasets and move data faster than the AMD part's 102.4 GB/s and 16 GB of LPDDR5. This matters for ray tracing, where the 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores provide dedicated acceleration that the AMD part's 8 RT cores and absent tensor cores cannot match.

The AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU wins in power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is less than a quarter of the NVIDIA card's 70 W, making it suitable for low-power or fanless designs. Its single USB Type-C output and compact unspecified footprint suggest a minimal physical profile, though dimensions are not recorded. The AMD part's 25.60 GPixel/s and 51.20 GTexel/s are lower but proportionally efficient given the power budget.

In terms of production status, both are Active. The AMD part was released on 2024-12-31, while the NVIDIA card was released on 2023-03-20, so the AMD product is newer by about a year and nine months. The NVIDIA card's slot-powered design, requiring no external power connectors and only a 250 W suggested PSU, makes it easy to integrate into existing workstation builds with a PCIe 4.0 x16 slot.

For professional workstation tasks such as compute, simulation, or AI inference, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the clear choice based on the data. Its benchmark score at the 95th percentile, its 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, and its 192 tensor cores provide the necessary resources. For embedded or console-style applications where power draw is the primary constraint, the AMD Ryzen Z2 A GPU's 15 W TDP and RDNA 2.0 architecture offer a lower-power alternative, though the database contains no performance measurements to validate its capabilities.