AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU vs NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The database positions both the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, with identical average benchmark scores of zero, indicating no recorded head-to-head performance data is available. The selection between these two rests entirely on architectural and specification differences rather than measured benchmark outcomes.

The data shows a stark division: the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU targets low-power, integrated graphics scenarios with a 28 W TDP, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation operates at 100 W and is classified as an IGP (integrated GPU) for portable devices. For workloads requiring massive parallel compute, FP32 throughput, or ray tracing, the NVIDIA part delivers 15.82 TFLOPS FP32, which is approximately 3.8 times the AMD part's 4.147 TFLOPS. For battery-conscious designs or fanless implementations, the AMD processor's lower power draw and RDNA 2.0 architecture make it a suitable fit.

Benchmark percentile data places both at the same level (50th percentile), but this reflects their standing across the entire GPU database, not their relative performance against each other. Without winsA or winsB values, the database records no direct comparison victories. The choice hinges on the target platform: the AMD chip is a console-class GPU with 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory, whereas the NVIDIA chip is a workstation-class mobile GPU with 12 GB of GDDR6 memory and substantially higher bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip on TSMC's 6 nm process node, packing 13,100 million transistors into a 208 mm² die for a density of 63.0 million transistors per square millimeter. Its architecture is RDNA 2.0, which supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process node, packing 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die for a density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter. Its architecture is Ada Lovelace, part of the GeForce 30-series family, and it also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The transistor density difference is significant: the NVIDIA chip packs nearly twice as many transistors per area (121.8M / mm² versus 63.0M / mm²), reflecting the tighter 5 nm process. The NVIDIA chip has 5120 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. The AMD chip has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed.

Clock behavior differs markedly. The AMD part runs at a base clock of 800 MHz and boosts to 2700 MHz. The NVIDIA part runs at a base clock of 1110 MHz and boosts to only 1545 MHz. Despite the lower boost clock on NVIDIA, the massive shading unit count drives its compute advantage. The AMD part's boost clock is 74.8% higher than its base clock, while the NVIDIA part's boost clock is only 39.2% higher, indicating different power and thermal design strategies.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU and the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation. WinsA and winsB are both zero, meaning neither part has a documented victory in direct comparison.

However, the specification data provides a basis for inferring performance deltas across several key metrics. The NVIDIA part's FP32 throughput is 15.82 TFLOPS, which is 3.815 times the AMD part's 4.147 TFLOPS. In practical terms, this means the NVIDIA GPU processes roughly 11.67 TFLOPS more single-precision compute per second.

Texture rate shows a similar gap: the NVIDIA part achieves 247.2 GTexel/s versus the AMD part's 129.6 GTexel/s, a 1.91x advantage. Pixel rate favors the NVIDIA part as well, at 98.88 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s, a 1.44x difference.

Memory bandwidth presents one of the largest disparities. The NVIDIA part's GDDR6 memory delivers 432.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus, while the AMD part's LPDDR5 memory delivers 102.4 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA bandwidth is 4.22 times higher, which is critical for data-intensive workloads like ray tracing, high-resolution textures, and AI inference.

FP16 compute tells a nuanced story. The AMD part delivers 8.294 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, meaning half-precision is double the single-precision rate. The NVIDIA part delivers 15.82 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning FP16 and FP32 run at the same rate. In absolute terms, the NVIDIA part's FP16 is 1.91 times the AMD part's FP16.

Memory capacity differs as well: 16 GB for AMD versus 12 GB for NVIDIA. The AMD part's larger capacity could benefit workloads with large datasets that fit in memory, but the NVIDIA part's 4.22x bandwidth advantage means it can move data through that memory much faster.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.82 TFLOPS FP32, which is 3.815 times the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU's 4.147 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 100 W, a 72 W difference.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 432.0 GB/s bandwidth from 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 102.4 GB/s from 16 GB LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API feature levels?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The NVIDIA chip contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the AMD chip contains 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation has 40 ray tracing cores, compared to 12 on the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in scenarios prioritizing power efficiency and memory capacity. Its 28 W TDP is 72 W lower than the NVIDIA part's 100 W, making it suitable for compact, fanless, or battery-powered designs. The 16 GB LPDDR5 memory exceeds the NVIDIA part's 12 GB by 4 GB, which can be advantageous for workloads with large memory footprints that do not require extreme bandwidth. The AMD part's higher boost clock (2700 MHz versus 1545 MHz) and its 2:1 FP16 ratio (8.294 TFLOPS) provide a different compute profile that may favor certain mixed-precision tasks where the 2:1 FP16 acceleration is beneficial. The pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s is within 12.48 GPixel/s of the NVIDIA part, demonstrating that rasterization throughput is not as far behind as compute throughput.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation wins in raw compute, memory bandwidth, and feature set. Its 15.82 TFLOPS FP32 is roughly 3.8x the AMD part's, and its FP16 output of 15.82 TFLOPS matches its FP32 rate, whereas the AMD part's FP16 is only 8.294 TFLOPS. The 432.0 GB/s bandwidth is 4.22x the AMD part's 102.4 GB/s, enabling much faster data movement for large textures, geometry, and AI workloads. The 160 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for neural network inference and training, which the AMD part lacks entirely. The 40 ray tracing cores versus 12 on the AMD part indicates a 3.33x advantage in ray tracing hardware. The NVIDIA part's texture rate of 247.2 GTexel/s is 1.91x the AMD part's 129.6 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 98.88 GPixel/s is 1.44x higher. The PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface on the NVIDIA part provides a standard high-bandwidth connection, while the AMD part lists no bus interface.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU | NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | 1110 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2700 MHz | 1545 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | LPDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz, 6.4 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 768 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 48 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | 40 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 160 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 98.88 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | 247.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.147 TFLOPS | 15.82 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) | 15.82 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 28 W | 100 W |

| Display Outputs | 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Bus Interface | None listed | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Release Date | 2024-12-31 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | None | Ampere-MW |

| Successor | None | Blackwell-MW |

The AMD part releases on 2024-12-31, while the NVIDIA part released on 2023-03-20, a difference of roughly 21 months. The NVIDIA part has a named predecessor (Ampere-MW) and successor (Blackwell-MW), while the AMD part lists neither. The NVIDIA part's slot width is listed as IGP, and its power connectors are listed as None, consistent with integrated mobile designs. The AMD part also lists no power connectors. Both parts are marked as Active in production status.