AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU vs NVIDIA Jetson T4000 Comparison

AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU and NVIDIA Jetson T4000 occupy different segments of the hardware spectrum, yet both are active products in the database. The Ryzen Z2 GPU is a console-oriented chip from AMD, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Jetson T4000 is a server-class Blackwell part from NVIDIA. The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark results, and both parts hold a 50th percentile ranking against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of zero. This analysis relies entirely on the specification fields and architectural details available in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU or the NVIDIA Jetson T4000. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and neither part has an average benchmark score above zero. As a result, the comparison must be drawn from the raw compute and memory specifications recorded for each device.

In raw FP32 throughput, the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS, which is 3.594 TFLOPS higher than the Jetson T4000's 4.700 TFLOPS. This translates to the Ryzen Z2 GPU offering roughly 76% more single-precision floating-point performance. The FP16 numbers mirror this exactly, with both parts listing a 1:1 ratio, so the Ryzen Z2 GPU also leads in half-precision compute at 8.294 TFLOPS versus 4.700 TFLOPS.

The Jetson T4000 counters in memory capacity and bandwidth. It carries 64 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus, producing 119.9 GB/s. The Jetson T4000 therefore has four times the memory capacity and roughly 2.28 times the memory bandwidth.

Pixel throughput favors the Ryzen Z2 GPU. The AMD part reaches 86.40 GPixel/s, while the Jetson T4000 manages 24.48 GPixel/s, a difference of 61.92 GPixel/s. The Ryzen Z2 GPU also leads in texture fill rate at 129.6 GTexel/s versus 73.44 GTexel/s, a margin of 56.16 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds show a contrasting picture. The Jetson T4000 runs at a fixed 1530 MHz for both base and boost, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has an 800 MHz base and a 2700 MHz boost. The AMD part's boost clock is 1170 MHz higher than the Jetson T4000's fixed clock. Memory clocks differ as well, with the Ryzen Z2 GPU listing 937 MHz (7.5 Gbps effective) and the Jetson T4000 at 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective).

The Jetson T4000 has twice the shading units, 1536 versus 768, and 64 tensor cores, which the Ryzen Z2 GPU lacks entirely. Both parts have 48 TMUs and 12 RT cores. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has 32 ROPs, double the Jetson T4000's 16 ROPs.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU is the stronger pure graphics processor. Its higher FP32 throughput, nearly double the pixel rate, and superior texture rate indicate it is built for rasterization workloads. The Jetson T4000, with its 64 GB memory pool and 64 tensor cores, is positioned for compute tasks that require large memory footprints or tensor acceleration.

For graphics-oriented workloads, the Ryzen Z2 GPU wins on every rasterization metric in the database: FP32, FP16, pixel rate, texture rate, and ROP count. Its 28 W TDP also makes it far more power-efficient on paper, though the Jetson T4000's 90 W TDP is listed for a server IGP form factor.

For memory-bound or AI-adjacent workloads, the Jetson T4000 is the clear choice. It offers 64 GB of memory, 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and 64 tensor cores. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has no tensor cores recorded, so any tensor-accelerated workload is simply unavailable on that part.

The Jetson T4000 uses a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface and has no display outputs, confirming its role as an accelerator rather than a display adapter. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has one USB Type-C display output and no bus interface listed, indicating a more consumer-facing or embedded graphics role. The launch MSRP of the Jetson T4000 is 1,999 USD, stated once here as recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS in FP32, while the NVIDIA Jetson T4000 delivers 4.700 TFLOPS. The Ryzen Z2 GPU is ahead by 3.594 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Jetson T4000 has 64 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5X on a 128-bit bus. The Jetson T4000 has four times the capacity.

Q: Does either GPU include tensor cores?

A: The Jetson T4000 includes 64 tensor cores. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has no tensor cores recorded in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU has a 28 W TDP, and the Jetson T4000 has a 90 W TDP. The Jetson T4000 lists a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no suggested PSU recorded.

Q: Which GPU supports display output?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU has one USB Type-C display output. The Jetson T4000 has no display outputs.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Jetson T4000 provides 273.2 GB/s, and the Ryzen Z2 GPU provides 119.9 GB/s. The Jetson T4000 has roughly 2.28 times the bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ across nearly every major specification field. The Ryzen Z2 GPU uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Jetson T4000 uses a 5 nm process, also from TSMC. Transistor counts differ sharply: the Ryzen Z2 GPU has 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a density of 142.6M per mm². The Jetson T4000 has an unknown transistor count on a 391 mm² die, with no density figure recorded.

Clock behavior diverges completely. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has an 800 MHz base and a 2700 MHz boost. The Jetson T4000 runs at a static 1530 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks also differ: 937 MHz (7.5 Gbps effective) for the Ryzen Z2 GPU, and 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective) for the Jetson T4000.

Memory configuration splits the pair. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5X across a 128-bit bus, delivering 119.9 GB/s. The Jetson T4000 has 64 GB of LPDDR5X across a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The compute units also differ: 768 shading units for the Ryzen Z2 GPU versus 1536 for the Jetson T4000, 32 ROPs versus 16, and 64 tensor cores present only on the Jetson T4000. Both have 48 TMUs and 12 RT cores.

Power and physical specifications are not aligned. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has a 28 W TDP, no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The Jetson T4000 has a 90 W TDP, an IGP slot width, no power connectors, and a 250 W suggested PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x8 on the Jetson T4000, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no bus interface listed. Display outputs are one USB Type-C on the Ryzen Z2 GPU, and none on the Jetson T4000. The Jetson T4000 has physical dimensions of 87 mm length, 100 mm height, and 15 mm width, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no dimensions recorded.

API support separates them further. The Ryzen Z2 GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Jetson T4000 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. Release dates also differ, with the Ryzen Z2 GPU dated 2024-12-31 and the Jetson T4000 dated 2026-01-04. The Jetson T4000 has a predecessor listed as Server Hopper and a successor as Server Rubin, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has neither.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen Z2 GPU is built on AMD's RDNA 3.0 architecture, using the Hawk Point chip, and is classified under the Console GPU (AMD) generation. The Jetson T4000 uses NVIDIA's Blackwell architecture, built on the GB10B chip, and is classified under the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation. The process nodes differ, with the Ryzen Z2 GPU at 4 nm and the Jetson T4000 at 5 nm, both from TSMC.

Core configuration reflects the architectural split. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 RT cores, with no tensor cores. The Jetson T4000 has 1536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 16 ROPs, 12 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. The presence of tensor cores on the Jetson T4000 is the most significant architectural differentiator, as the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no recorded tensor hardware.

Memory architecture also differs. The Ryzen Z2 GPU uses a 128-bit memory bus, while the Jetson T4000 uses a 256-bit bus. Both use LPDDR5X, but the Jetson T4000 operates at a higher effective speed of 8.5 Gbps versus 7.5 Gbps. The Jetson T4000's larger die size of 391 mm² compared to 178 mm² suggests a more complex memory subsystem, though transistor counts are not fully recorded for the NVIDIA part.

API support is a structural difference. The Ryzen Z2 GPU exposes DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it suitable for standard graphics stacks. The Jetson T4000 lists N/A for all three APIs, indicating it is not designed for conventional graphics rendering. The Jetson T4000's PCIe 5.0 x8 interface and lack of display outputs reinforce its compute-only design, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU's USB Type-C output and absence of a bus interface point toward an integrated or embedded graphics role.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in rasterization and graphics compute. Its FP32 throughput of 8.294 TFLOPS is 76% higher than the Jetson T4000's 4.700 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s is more than triple the Jetson T4000's 24.48 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s is 76% higher than 73.44 GTexel/s. It also has double the ROP count, 32 versus 16, and a higher boost clock of 2700 MHz versus 1530 MHz. The Ryzen Z2 GPU also draws less power at 28 W versus 90 W, and it is the only one of the two with display output support.

The NVIDIA Jetson T4000 wins in memory capacity, bandwidth, and tensor processing. It offers 64 GB of memory versus 16 GB, a 256-bit bus versus 128-bit, and 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth versus 119.9 GB/s. Its 64 tensor cores provide compute capability that the Ryzen Z2 GPU lacks entirely. The Jetson T4000 also has double the shading units, 1536 versus 768, and a higher memory clock at 1067 MHz versus 937 MHz. It supports PCIe 5.0 x8, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has no bus interface recorded.

The split is straightforward. The Ryzen Z2 GPU is the choice for graphics rendering, pixel processing, and lower-power operation. The Jetson T4000 is the choice for large-memory compute tasks, tensor workloads, and server installations where display output is unnecessary. Both parts hold the same 50th percentile ranking in the database, and both are marked as active in production, but their recorded strengths point to entirely different deployment scenarios.