AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs NVIDIA Jetson T4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the NVIDIA Jetson T4000. Both products show an identical percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 0 for each. This indicates that neither part has completed a standardized benchmark run in the current database snapshot, so the comparison must be built from architectural specifications and derived performance metrics rather than measured frame rates or compute scores.

The raw compute outputs, however, paint a clear picture. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 delivers 4.700 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, which is approximately 13% higher than the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU's 4.147 TFLOPS. In FP16 workloads, the gap widens depending on how each architecture handles reduced precision. The AMD part reaches 8.294 TFLOPS FP16 using a 2:1 rate, effectively doubling its FP32 throughput, while the NVIDIA part holds at 4.700 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio. For mixed-precision AI inference, the AMD GPU would complete FP16 matrix operations at nearly double the rate of the NVIDIA part, assuming the workload saturates the shader array. Conversely, for FP32-heavy simulations, the NVIDIA part holds a modest lead.

Pixel throughput favors AMD decisively. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU achieves 86.40 GPixel/s, while the Jetson T4000 manages only 24.48 GPixel/s. This 3.5x advantage comes from the AMD part's 32 ROPs versus 16 ROPs, combined with a higher boost clock of 2700 MHz against the NVIDIA part's fixed 1530 MHz. Texture fill rate tells a different story: both parts have 48 TMUs, but the AMD GPU's higher clock yields 129.6 GTexel/s versus 73.44 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part. The AMD GPU leads texture throughput by roughly 1.77x.

Memory bandwidth heavily favors the Jetson T4000. The NVIDIA part uses 64 GB of LPDDR5X across a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 across a 128-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s. That is a 2.67x bandwidth advantage for NVIDIA. For large dataset streaming or multi-model AI workloads, the Jetson T4000 can feed its compute units far more effectively, while the AMD part's smaller memory pool may bottleneck on data residency.

Ray tracing hardware is nominally equal at 12 RT cores per part, but the underlying architectures differ. The AMD GPU runs these cores at up to 2700 MHz, while the NVIDIA part runs at 1530 MHz. Without benchmark scores, the database cannot quantify the practical ray tracing performance delta, but clock-for-clock the AMD implementation has a higher ceiling.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Rembrandt+, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 uses the Blackwell architecture on a GB10B chip, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The smaller process node gives NVIDIA a density advantage, though the database lists transistor counts as 13,100 million for AMD and "unknown" for NVIDIA. The die size measurements confirm the gap: AMD's die is 208 mm², while NVIDIA's is 391 mm². Notably, the NVIDIA die is nearly double the physical size despite using a smaller process node, which implies a substantially higher transistor budget, but the database does not provide that figure.

Shading unit counts differ significantly. The AMD GPU has 768 shading units, while the NVIDIA part has 1536, exactly double. This explains why the FP32 throughput gap is only 13% despite the clock difference: NVIDIA's wider array compensates for its lower boost clock (1530 MHz versus 2700 MHz). The AMD part relies on high frequency to extract performance from a narrower array, while the NVIDIA part uses width to offset a lower clock.

Tensor core availability is exclusive to the NVIDIA part. The Jetson T4000 includes 64 tensor cores, while the AMD GPU has no tensor core field in the database. This makes the NVIDIA part the only one of the two with dedicated hardware for AI acceleration. The AMD GPU must rely on its shader array for any matrix operations, which explains the FP16 2:1 rate as a general-purpose compute path rather than a specialized tensor path.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. AMD uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 with a 128-bit bus, while NVIDIA uses 64 GB of LPDDR5X with a 256-bit bus. The memory clock also differs: AMD runs at 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), NVIDIA at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The combination of wider bus, faster data rate, and higher capacity gives the Jetson T4000 a commanding memory advantage in both bandwidth and storage capacity.

Power envelopes reflect the intended deployment. The AMD part is rated at 28 W TDP with no power connectors and a single USB Type-C display output. The NVIDIA part is rated at 90 W TDP, also with no power connectors, but it requires a 250 W suggested PSU and has no display outputs. The NVIDIA part is a server-oriented IGP (integrated graphics package) with PCIe 5.0 x8 connectivity, while the AMD part appears designed for compact, low-power client devices.

API support separates the two completely. The AMD GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part lists all APIs as N/A, meaning it has no graphics driver stack for conventional rendering. This is a compute-only device in the database's classification.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in scenarios requiring high-frequency rasterization. Its 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate make it the stronger choice for traditional graphics workloads, assuming an API such as DirectX 12 Ultimate or Vulkan is present. The 2:1 FP16 rate of 8.294 TFLOPS also gives it an edge in mixed-precision compute that can tolerate reduced precision, provided the memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s does not become the limiting factor.

The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 wins in server-side compute and AI inference. Its 64 tensor cores provide dedicated matrix engines that the AMD part lacks entirely. The 273.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and 64 GB capacity allow large model residency and high-throughput data streaming. The 4.700 TFLOPS FP32 rate is slightly ahead, and the 1:1 FP16 rate means no precision penalty when switching data types. The PCIe 5.0 x8 interface and 250 W suggested PSU indicate a host-integrated accelerator intended for data center boards rather than standalone graphics.

For power-constrained embedded or mobile designs, the AMD part's 28 W TDP versus 90 W TDP is a decisive operational difference. The AMD GPU can run without additional cooling or power delivery hardware, while the NVIDIA part requires substantial thermal and power headroom. Conversely, for a headless server node where power is available, the NVIDIA part's compute density and memory capacity justify the higher draw.

The production status for both is Active. The AMD part released on 2024-12-31, while the NVIDIA part released on 2026-01-04, indicating a newer product. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor listed as Server Hopper and a successor as Server Rubin, placing it in a clear product lineage. The AMD part has no predecessor or successor listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 leads with 4.700 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 4.147 TFLOPS for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. This is a 13% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU includes 12 RT cores under the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 also lists 12 RT cores, so both have ray tracing hardware.

Q: Which part has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 delivers 273.2 GB/s from 64 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 102.4 GB/s from 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Can the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 output to a display?

A: No, the database lists its display outputs as "No outputs." The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has one USB Type-C display output.

Q: Are these parts comparable for AI workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 has 64 tensor cores, while the AMD part has none. For AI inference, the NVIDIA part has dedicated hardware, plus a 2.67x memory bandwidth advantage and 4x the memory capacity.

Q: What is the power requirement for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is rated at 28 W TDP. The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 is rated at 90 W TDP with a 250 W suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU | NVIDIA Jetson T4000 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Blackwell |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 391 mm² |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | unknown |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 1530 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 1530 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps) | 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 64 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 273.2 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 48 | 48 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 12 | 12 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 24.48 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 73.44 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 4.700 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) | 4.700 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 90 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | Not listed | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | N/A |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 1,999 USD |

| Predecessor | None | Server Hopper |

| Successor | None | Server Rubin |