AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark runs for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the NVIDIA N1 20SM. Both parts carry an average benchmark score of 0 and an identical percentile ranking of 50th among all GPUs, which indicates that neither has accumulated a meaningful sample of published performance results. Without executed workloads, the comparative analysis must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures recorded in the database.

The raw compute numbers do provide a starting point. The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU reaches 4.147 TFLOPS. That difference gives the NVIDIA part roughly 2.9 times the single-precision floating-point throughput of the AMD part. In FP16 workloads, the gap changes shape depending on how each architecture handles reduced precision. The AMD part reaches 8.294 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it doubles its FP32 rate when using FP16. The NVIDIA part reports 12.01 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not gain any throughput advantage from FP16 operations. Even with AMD's 2:1 advantage, the NVIDIA part still leads by 12.01 TFLOPS versus 8.294 TFLOPS, a 44.8% advantage in raw FP16 throughput.

Texture processing shows a similar pattern. The NVIDIA N1 20SM reaches a texture rate of 375.4 GTexel/s, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU manages 129.6 GTexel/s. That represents a 189.7% advantage for the NVIDIA part. Pixel throughput tells a different story. The AMD part outputs 86.40 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA part outputs 56.30 GPixel/s. Here the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU leads by 53.5%, a notable inversion given the NVIDIA part's larger compute and texture figures. The ROP count explains part of this: the AMD part has 32 ROPs versus 24 on the NVIDIA part, and the AMD part runs a higher boost clock of 2700 MHz versus 2346 MHz on the NVIDIA part.

Memory bandwidth also splits the two. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses a 256-bit bus with LPDDR5X memory at 273.2 GB/s. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses a 128-bit bus with LPDDR5 memory at 102.4 GB/s. The NVIDIA part delivers 166.8% more bandwidth. Memory capacity differs dramatically as well: 128 GB on the NVIDIA part versus 16 GB on the AMD part. Clock behavior adds another layer. The AMD part boosts to 2700 MHz from an 800 MHz base, while the NVIDIA part boosts to 2346 MHz from a 741 MHz base. The AMD part has the higher boost ceiling, but the NVIDIA part sustains a larger overall compute throughput per clock due to its 2560 shading units versus 768 on the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different design lineages. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, classified in the database as a Console GPU generation from AMD. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, classified as a Blackwell IGP from the N1x generation.

Process technology separates them at the foundry level. The AMD part is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The die sizes differ substantially: the AMD part measures 208 mm², while the NVIDIA part measures 382 mm². The AMD part packs 13,100 million transistors into that smaller die, giving a transistor density of 63.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA part has an unknown transistor count in the database, so no density figure can be calculated for it.

Shader organization differs in scale. The AMD part contains 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA part contains 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 20 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA part also includes 80 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the AMD part's recorded specifications. This tensor core presence suggests the NVIDIA architecture carries dedicated hardware for matrix operations, though the database does not record corresponding tensor performance numbers.

Memory subsystems reflect different design priorities. The AMD part uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 over a 128-bit interface, producing 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X over a 256-bit interface, producing 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part's memory clock runs at 1067 MHz with an effective 8.5 Gbps data rate, while the AMD part's memory clock runs at 800 MHz with an effective 6.4 Gbps data rate.

API support shows a stark contrast. The AMD part records DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The NVIDIA part records N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database. This suggests the NVIDIA N1 20SM may not expose conventional graphics APIs in the same manner, possibly reflecting its IGP classification. The NVIDIA part does list a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the AMD part does not record a bus interface. Display outputs differ as well: the AMD part lists a single USB Type-C output, while the NVIDIA part lists a single HDMI output. The NVIDIA part is classified as an IGP with no slot width, while the AMD part does not record a slot width but also lists no power connectors.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in pixel throughput. Its 86.40 GPixel/s exceeds the NVIDIA part's 56.30 GPixel/s by 53.5%. This advantage comes from its higher ROP count of 32 versus 24 and its higher boost clock of 2700 MHz versus 2346 MHz. Workloads that stress fill-rate operations, such as traditional rasterization at high resolutions with heavy overdraw, would favor the AMD part based on these recorded figures.

The AMD part also wins on boost clock frequency. Its 2700 MHz boost exceeds the NVIDIA part's 2346 MHz. This higher clock speed can translate to lower latency for certain single-threaded or lightly parallel workloads, though the database does not include latency measurements.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM wins everywhere else in raw throughput. Its FP32 performance of 12.01 TFLOPS is 2.9 times the AMD part's 4.147 TFLOPS. Its FP16 performance of 12.01 TFLOPS is 44.8% higher than the AMD part's 8.294 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 375.4 GTexel/s is 189.7% higher than the AMD part's 129.6 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s is 166.8% higher than the AMD part's 102.4 GB/s. Its memory capacity of 128 GB is eight times the AMD part's 16 GB. It also carries more shading units (2560 versus 768), more TMUs (160 versus 48), more ray tracing cores (20 versus 12), and the only tensor cores in the comparison at 80.

The ray tracing comparison deserves attention. The NVIDIA part has 20 ray tracing cores versus 12 on the AMD part, a 66.7% advantage in core count. The database does not record ray tracing performance benchmarks, so the practical impact of this core count difference cannot be quantified beyond the raw hardware allocation.

Power characteristics differ in an important way. The AMD part records a TDP of 28 W. The NVIDIA part records an unknown TDP. This means the AMD part's performance figures are achieved within a known 28 W envelope, while the NVIDIA part's power draw remains unquantified in the database. The AMD part's lower absolute performance comes with a known power limit, whereas the NVIDIA part's higher throughput comes with no recorded power constraint.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is approximately 2.9 times faster in this metric.

Q: How does memory capacity compare between the two?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM includes 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU includes 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory. The NVIDIA part provides eight times the memory capacity.

Q: Which GPU has the higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU achieves 86.40 GPixel/s, which is 53.5% higher than the NVIDIA N1 20SM's 56.30 GPixel/s. The AMD part's 32 ROPs and 2700 MHz boost clock contribute to this lead.

Q: Does the NVIDIA part support the same graphics APIs as the AMD part?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU records DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The NVIDIA N1 20SM records N/A for all three of those APIs in the database.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM provides 273.2 GB/s over a 256-bit LPDDR5X interface. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU provides 102.4 GB/s over a 128-bit LPDDR5 interface. The NVIDIA part has 166.8% more bandwidth.

Q: Does the AMD part have tensor cores?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU does not record any tensor cores. The NVIDIA N1 20SM includes 80 tensor cores.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two GPUs with opposite design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU operates within a 28 W power envelope and achieves its best results in pixel throughput, where its 86.40 GPixel/s outpaces the NVIDIA part. It also carries a higher boost clock of 2700 MHz and a conventional API stack with DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. These characteristics point toward a part designed for traditional graphics workloads with a known power budget.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM dominates the computational metrics. Its FP32 throughput of 12.01 TFLOPS, FP16 throughput of 12.01 TFLOPS, texture rate of 375.4 GTexel/s, memory bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s, and memory capacity of 128 GB all exceed the AMD part by substantial margins. It also carries 80 tensor cores, a feature the AMD part lacks entirely. However, its API support is recorded as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which raises questions about how its compute resources are accessed.

Users who need traditional rasterization performance with established graphics API support would find the AMD part's profile more familiar. Users who need maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, and tensor core acceleration would gravitate toward the NVIDIA part. The NVIDIA part's unknown TDP and unknown transistor count leave its efficiency profile incomplete. The AMD part's 28 W TDP makes its efficiency measurable, while the NVIDIA part's power draw remains an open question in the database.

Neither part has accumulated benchmark scores yet, so real-world performance validation is absent. The theoretical specifications suggest the NVIDIA part is the stronger compute device by a wide margin, with the AMD part holding a narrower advantage in pixel fill rate and a higher boost clock. The choice between them depends on whether the workload prioritizes the AMD part's fill-rate strengths and conventional API support or the NVIDIA part's massive compute, memory, and tensor core advantages.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU | NVIDIA N1 20SM |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | Rembrandt+ | GB20B |

| Generation | Console GPU (AMD) | Blackwell IGP (N1x) |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 382 mm² |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 741 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 2346 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective | 1067 MHz 8.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 128 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

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

| Shading Units | 768 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 48 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 24 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | 20 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 56.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 375.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 12.01 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) | 12.01 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | unknown |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

| Bus Interface | null | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | 1x HDMI |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31T17:00:00.000Z | 2026-05-31T17:00:00.000Z |