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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU versus the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. The comparison therefore relies on the recorded specification data, the available benchmark scores for the NVIDIA card, and the percentile rankings assigned to each product.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has two recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 124,812, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 109,364. These results produce an average benchmark score of 117,088. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has no recorded benchmark scores, and its average benchmark score is listed as zero. Its percentile ranking among all GPUs is 50, meaning it sits at the midpoint of the database's performance distribution. The NVIDIA card holds a percentile ranking of 95, placing it in the top 5 percent of all recorded GPUs.

The nearest rivals for the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation provide a useful context for interpreting its scores. The NVIDIA GB10 scores 117,393, which is 0.3 percent higher than the RTX 4000 SFF's average. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 scores 118,976, 1.6 percent higher. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB scores 114,395, which is 2.4 percent lower. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113,944, which is 2.8 percent lower. These deltas show the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation clustered tightly with its nearest competitors, with all four rivals within a 2.8 percent band around its average score.

The raw compute specifications show a substantial gap between the two cards. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS. That places the NVIDIA card at roughly 4.6 times the FP32 throughput of the AMD part. The FP16 comparison is similar in magnitude, with the NVIDIA card at 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) versus the AMD card at 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1), though the AMD figure represents a doubled-rate execution mode.

Texture and pixel throughput follow the same pattern. The NVIDIA card reaches 299.5 GTexel/s of texture rate and 99.84 GPixel/s of pixel rate. The AMD card reaches 129.6 GTexel/s and 86.40 GPixel/s respectively. The NVIDIA card leads in texture rate by a factor of approximately 2.3, while its pixel rate advantage is narrower at roughly 1.16 times the AMD figure.

Memory bandwidth also favors the NVIDIA card decisively. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, yielding 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card delivers 2.7 times the memory bandwidth of the AMD part.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU holds advantages in a few specific areas based on the recorded data. Its base clock runs at 800 MHz, higher than the NVIDIA card's 720 MHz base clock. Its boost clock runs at 2700 MHz, substantially higher than the NVIDIA card's 1560 MHz boost clock. The AMD card also carries a lower thermal design power at 28 W versus 70 W for the NVIDIA card. This lower power draw, combined with the absence of any power connectors on both cards, positions the AMD part as the more power-efficient choice on paper.

The AMD card also uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, which supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card supports the same API set. Both cards share identical API support, so no advantage exists there.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in nearly every raw performance category. Its FP32 compute is 19.17 TFLOPS versus 4.147 TFLOPS. Its FP16 compute is 19.17 TFLOPS versus 8.294 TFLOPS. Its texture rate is 299.5 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s. Its memory bandwidth is 280.0 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. It has more shading units (6144 versus 768), more texture mapping units (192 versus 48), more raster operation units (64 versus 32), more ray tracing cores (48 versus 12), and 192 tensor cores, a feature the AMD card lacks entirely.

The NVIDIA card also carries a 20 GB memory capacity versus 16 GB on the AMD card. Its bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, while the AMD card has no recorded bus interface. The NVIDIA card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the AMD card has a single USB Type-C output. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot with dimensions of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the AMD card has no recorded physical dimensions.

The NVIDIA card's benchmark presence and 95th percentile ranking indicate that it occupies a high-performance tier in the database. The AMD card's 50th percentile ranking, combined with its zero recorded benchmark scores, suggests it sits in the mid-range of the database's performance distribution. The data shows the NVIDIA card winning in every measured performance category, while the AMD card wins only in clock speeds and power consumption.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU delivers 4.147 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each card have, and what type?

A: The NVIDIA card has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus. The AMD card has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA card reaches 280.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the AMD card reaches 102.4 GB/s, giving the NVIDIA card approximately 2.7 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 48 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 12.

Q: Does the AMD card have tensor cores?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has no tensor cores recorded in the database. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 192 tensor cores.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for each card?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU boosts to 2700 MHz, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation boosts to 1560 MHz.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the Rembrandt+ chip built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip built on the Ada Lovelace architecture. The AMD card is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA card uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

Transistor counts differ substantially. The AMD card contains 13,100 million transistors on a die size of 208 mm², producing a transistor density of 63.0 million transistors per mm². The NVIDIA card contains 35,800 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², producing a transistor density of 121.8 million transistors per mm². The NVIDIA card has roughly 2.7 times the transistor count and 1.9 times the density.

Memory configurations differ in size, type, bus width, and bandwidth. The AMD card uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ across every category. The AMD card has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 raster operation units, and 12 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA card has 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores.

Clock speeds favor the AMD card. Its base clock is 800 MHz and its boost clock is 2700 MHz. The NVIDIA card has a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz. The AMD card's memory clock is 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective rate, while the NVIDIA card's memory clock is 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective rate.

The NVIDIA card has a dual-slot form factor with dimensions of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The AMD card has no recorded dimensions. The NVIDIA card uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface, while the AMD card has no recorded bus interface. The NVIDIA card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the AMD card has one USB Type-C output.

The NVIDIA card lists a suggested power supply of 250 W, while the AMD card has no suggested PSU recorded. Both cards have no power connectors. The NVIDIA card belongs to the GeForce 40-series and the Workstation Ada generation, with a predecessor of Workstation Ampere and a successor of Blackwell PRO W. The AMD card belongs to the Console GPU (AMD) generation with no predecessor or successor recorded.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between the two cards reflects two distinct design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, a graphics-focused design that emphasizes efficiency and clock speed. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, a compute-heavy design that integrates dedicated tensor cores and a much larger ray tracing core count.

The process node difference matters for density and power characteristics. The AMD card uses a 6 nm TSMC process, while the NVIDIA card uses a 5 nm TSMC process. The smaller process node on the NVIDIA card contributes to its 121.8 million transistors per mm² density, compared to 63.0 million per mm² on the AMD card. The AMD card compensates with higher clock speeds, reaching a 2700 MHz boost versus the NVIDIA card's 1560 MHz boost.

The ray tracing implementation differs in scale. The AMD card has 12 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA card has 48. The NVIDIA card also includes 192 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. This indicates a fundamental difference in compute capability, with the NVIDIA card supporting tensor-accelerated workloads that the AMD card cannot execute through dedicated hardware.

Memory architecture differs in type and efficiency. The AMD card uses LPDDR5, a low-power memory typically integrated into compact or mobile designs. The NVIDIA card uses GDDR6, a dedicated graphics memory with higher bandwidth per pin. The AMD card's 128-bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth reflects its power-conscious design, while the NVIDIA card's 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth reflects its performance-oriented positioning.

The power delivery design differs as well. The AMD card draws 28 W, making it suitable for power-constrained environments. The NVIDIA card draws 70 W and specifies a 250 W suggested power supply. Both cards avoid external power connectors, relying on slot or board power. The NVIDIA card's dual-slot design and 168 mm length indicate a physically larger board, while the AMD card has no recorded physical dimensions.

The display output configuration reveals different use cases. The AMD card provides a single USB Type-C output, suggesting integration into devices with minimal external display requirements. The NVIDIA card provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, indicating a workstation-oriented design meant to drive multiple high-resolution displays simultaneously.

The transistor budget allocation differs significantly. The AMD card uses 13,100 million transistors across 208 mm², while the NVIDIA card uses 35,800 million transistors across 294 mm². The NVIDIA card's larger transistor count supports its 6144 shading units, 192 tensor cores, and 48 ray tracing cores. The AMD card's smaller count supports 768 shading units and 12 ray tracing cores, with the saved die area and power budget directed toward higher clock speeds.

Both cards support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The architectural differences therefore manifest in raw throughput, feature support for tensor operations, and memory bandwidth, rather than in API compatibility. The NVIDIA card's 95th percentile ranking versus the AMD card's 50th percentile ranking in the database reflects this architectural gap in measured performance outcomes.