AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the process node difference between the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses a 6 nm TSMC process node, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses a 5 nm TSMC process node.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between the two cards?

A: Both cards have 16 GB of memory, but the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses LPDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W, whereas the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W. The NVIDIA card also has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the AMD card does not list a suggested PSU.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU provides 1x USB Type-C output, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: How do the shading unit counts differ?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768 shading units, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 2816 shading units.

Q: What is the release date for each product?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU was released on 2024-12-31, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation was released on 2024-02-11.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a decisive split in favor of the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation across all benchmark categories. The NVIDIA card delivers 12.00 TFLOPS FP32 compute, compared to 4.147 TFLOPS for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. This nearly threefold gap in raw compute throughput translates directly into the benchmark results, where the RTX 2000 Ada Generation records an average benchmark score of 18954 against the AMD card's 0 (no benchmark scores are recorded for the AMD part in the database).

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation also wins on memory bandwidth, delivering 256.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. With a 128-bit bus on both cards, the GDDR6 memory on the NVIDIA part operates at 16 Gbps effective, while the LPDDR5 on the AMD part operates at 6.4 Gbps effective. This bandwidth advantage matters for texture-heavy workloads and compute tasks that stream large datasets.

Where the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a positional advantage is in power consumption. The AMD card draws 28 W, less than half the 70 W TDP of the NVIDIA card. For compact or power-constrained systems, the AMD part offers substantial compute per watt, though the database does not record a direct efficiency metric. The AMD card also has a smaller physical footprint requirement, as it lists no length or height dimensions and no slot width, whereas the NVIDIA card is dual-slot with a length of 168 mm and a height of 69 mm.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation wins on feature breadth as well. It includes 88 tensor cores and 22 RT cores, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU lists 12 RT cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA part also has a higher pixel rate at 102.2 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s and a higher texture rate at 187.4 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s.

For use cases, the data indicates the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads, ray tracing, and tasks that benefit from tensor core acceleration. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, with its lower TDP and minimal power connectors (none listed), fits scenarios where power budget is the primary constraint and raw throughput is secondary.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip based on RDNA 2.0 architecture, categorized as a Console GPU generation. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip based on Ada Lovelace architecture, categorized as a Workstation Ada generation.

The process technology differs significantly. The AMD card is built on a 6 nm TSMC node with 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0M per mm². The NVIDIA card uses a 5 nm TSMC node with 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, yielding a higher density of 118.9M per mm². The NVIDIA chip packs more transistors into a smaller area, which supports its higher compute throughput.

The compute architecture differs in execution resource allocation. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 2816 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. This larger execution resource pool on the NVIDIA side explains its higher pixel rate (102.2 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (187.4 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s).

Ray tracing hardware exists on both cards but differs in scale. The AMD part has 12 RT cores, while the NVIDIA part has 22 RT cores. The NVIDIA card also includes 88 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. Tensor cores enable AI-accelerated workloads, a feature absent from the AMD specification sheet.

The FP16 implementation differs. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS FP16 using a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, indicating packed math. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation delivers 12.00 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not double the rate for half precision. This suggests the NVIDIA card maintains consistent throughput across precision formats.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical on paper. The memory type and bus interface differ, with the NVIDIA card using PCIe 4.0 x8 and the AMD card listing no bus interface. The NVIDIA card also has a predecessor (Workstation Ampere) and successor (Blackwell PRO W), while the AMD card has no listed predecessor or successor.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Process and Die: The AMD card uses a 6 nm process with a 208 mm² die and 13,100 million transistors. The NVIDIA card uses a 5 nm process with a 159 mm² die and 18,900 million transistors. Transistor density is 63.0M per mm² for AMD versus 118.9M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clocks: The AMD card has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 1620 MHz and a boost clock of 2130 MHz. Memory clocks are 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) for AMD and 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory: Both have 16 GB and a 128-bit bus, but AMD uses LPDDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while NVIDIA uses GDDR6 with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute Resources: AMD has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 RT cores with no tensor cores. NVIDIA has 2816 shading units, 88 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 22 RT cores, and 88 tensor cores.

Throughput: AMD delivers 4.147 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.294 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). NVIDIA delivers 12.00 TFLOPS FP32 and 12.00 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). Pixel rates are 86.40 GPixel/s for AMD and 102.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates are 129.6 GTexel/s for AMD and 187.4 GTexel/s for NVIDIA.

Power and Physical: AMD has a TDP of 28 W and no power connectors. NVIDIA has a TDP of 70 W, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 250 W, and a dual-slot form factor with dimensions of 168 mm by 69 mm.

Connectivity: AMD provides 1x USB Type-C. NVIDIA provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a and uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Release and Status: AMD was released 2024-12-31 with no launch MSRP. NVIDIA was released 2024-02-11 with a launch MSRP of 649 USD. Both are Active production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records ten benchmark scores for the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has no recorded benchmark scores. This absence of data for the AMD part means the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on NVIDIA's recorded performance and the specification deltas.

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation achieves its highest recorded score in Geekbench Vulkan at 83360, followed by Geekbench OpenCL at 78074. The PassMark G3D score is 16927, and the PassMark GPU Compute score is 7834. In legacy DirectX tests, the NVIDIA card scores 216 in PassMark DirectX 9, 138 in DirectX 11, 82 in DirectX 10, and 71 in DirectX 12. The PassMark G2D score is 1072. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1767.

The average benchmark score for the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 18954, placing it at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 with an average score of 19030 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 with 19036 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile with 19049 (0.5% higher), and the NVIDIA Tesla K80 with 18866 (0.5% lower). The RTX 2000 Ada Generation sits within a tight cluster of performance, within 0.5% of its closest competitors in either direction.

For the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, the percentile ranking is 50th among all GPUs, but with a recorded average benchmark score of 0 and no individual benchmark entries, the practical comparison against the NVIDIA card's 18954 average is not possible from measured results. The specification data, however, shows the NVIDIA card delivering 2.9 times the FP32 throughput (12.00 TFLOPS versus 4.147 TFLOPS) and 2.5 times the memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s).

The RT core count difference of 22 versus 12 suggests the NVIDIA card has nearly double the ray tracing hardware. The tensor core presence on the NVIDIA card (88 units) versus none on the AMD card indicates a capability gap for AI and DLSS-type workloads. The NVIDIA card also has 3.7 times the shading units (2816 versus 768) and 1.8 times the TMUs (88 versus 48).

The benchmark cluster around the NVIDIA card's 18954 average score shows it competing with mid-range desktop and mobile parts from both vendors. The Quadro K6000 and Tesla K80 are older workstation accelerators, while the Radeon RX 6600 is a contemporary desktop gaming card, and the RTX 4050 Mobile is a laptop GPU. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation delivers performance within 0.5% of all these parts, indicating consistent positioning despite its workstation classification.