AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition vs NVIDIA Quadro GP100 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 and AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition are both end-of-life professional workstation cards from the Pascal and GCN 5.0 eras, respectively. While they share similar physical dimensions and dual-slot coolers, the benchmark data reveals a clear single-test winner, but their architectural philosophies and specification sheets tell a more nuanced story about where each card was designed to excel.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and it shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA Quadro GP100. The NVIDIA card scores 87,445 points, while the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition manages 76,111 points. This represents a 14.9% advantage for the Quadro GP100, a substantial margin in a compute-oriented API like OpenCL.

This head-to-head result is consistent with the broader competitive landscape. The Quadro GP100 sits at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Vega Frontier Edition sits at the 91st percentile. Looking at their nearest rivals, the Quadro GP100's score places it just 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 (87,108) and 2.1% ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 40HX (85,637), while trailing the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (91,671) by 4.6%. The Vega Frontier Edition, by contrast, is only 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (72,379) and 1.8% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (72,098). The Quadro GP100's lead over its own rival set is smaller than its lead over the Vega Frontier Edition, which suggests the AMD card is positioned slightly further down the performance stack.

However, the benchmark picture is incomplete because the two cards were not tested across the same suite. The Vega Frontier Edition has additional data points: 72,061 in Geekbench Metal and 71,937 in Geekbench Vulkan. These scores are notably lower than its OpenCL result, indicating that under Metal and Vulkan, the AMD card is roughly 5-6% slower than its own OpenCL performance. The Quadro GP100, lacking these tests, cannot be compared on those APIs, so the OpenCL result stands as the only true apples-to-apples comparison in the dataset.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro GP100 wins the only benchmark where both cards appear, so in direct competition it is the clear performance leader. Its OpenCL score of 87,445 is not just higher than the Vega Frontier Edition's 76,111; it also exceeds the average benchmark score of the Vega card (73,370) by a significant margin. In fact, the Quadro GP100's single benchmark score is higher than the Vega Frontier Edition's best individual result by 15% and its average by over 19%. This suggests that for OpenCL-accelerated workloads, the NVIDIA card is the more robust choice.

The Vega Frontier Edition's strengths are not evident in the benchmark data, as it loses the only head-to-head test. Its wins are zero in the dataset. However, its additional benchmark entries show that it is a consistent performer across multiple APIs, with scores ranging from 71,937 (Vulkan) to 76,111 (OpenCL). This consistency could be interpreted as a flexibility advantage for heterogeneous workloads, but the numbers themselves do not show a single instance where the AMD card outperforms the NVIDIA card.

For users prioritizing the highest raw compute throughput in OpenCL, the Quadro GP100 is the unambiguous pick. For those who need cross-API compatibility, the Vega Frontier Edition at least demonstrates functional capabilities in Metal and Vulkan, though the Quadro GP100's lack of those benchmark entries prevents any conclusion about NVIDIA's performance in those domains.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 uses the Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC, while the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition uses GCN 5.0, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node difference is minor, but the transistor counts reveal divergent design strategies. The GP100 packs 15,300 million transistors on a 610 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.1 million per square millimeter. The Vega 10 chip contains 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, with a nearly identical density of 25.3 million per square millimeter. Despite the similar density, the NVIDIA chip is roughly 23% larger in die area and 22% higher in transistor count.

The compute configurations diverge sharply. The GP100 has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The Vega Frontier Edition has more shading units (4,096) and more TMUs (256), but significantly fewer ROPs at 64. This asymmetry explains their respective rate metrics: the GP100 achieves a pixel rate of 138.5 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 323.2 GTexel/s, while the Vega card posts 102.4 GPixel/s and 409.6 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA card excels at pixel throughput, while the AMD card has a 26.7% advantage in texture fill rate.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. Both cards use 16 GB of HBM2, but the GP100 employs a 4096-bit memory bus, whereas the Vega Frontier Edition uses a narrower 2048-bit bus. This yields a bandwidth of 732.2 GB/s for the NVIDIA card versus 483.8 GB/s for the AMD card — a 51.4% advantage for the Quadro GP100. The memory clock speeds also differ, with the GP100 running at 715 MHz (1430 Mbps effective) and the Vega card at 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective). The AMD card's higher memory clock partially compensates for its narrower bus, but not enough to close the bandwidth gap. The GP100's wider bus is the defining memory characteristic, giving it a substantial edge in bandwidth-bound workloads.

Specification Differences

The specifications reveal a mixed bag of advantages. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has a higher transistor count (15,300 million versus 12,500 million), a larger die (610 mm² versus 495 mm²), and a wider memory bus (4096 bit versus 2048 bit). Its memory bandwidth of 732.2 GB/s dwarfs the AMD card's 483.8 GB/s. The GP100 also has more ROPs (96 versus 64) and a higher pixel rate (138.5 GPixel/s versus 102.4 GPixel/s). Its base clock is lower at 1304 MHz versus 1382 MHz, and its boost clock is also lower at 1443 MHz versus 1600 MHz.

The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition counters with a higher shading unit count (4,096 versus 3,584), more TMUs (256 versus 224), and a faster texture rate (409.6 GTexel/s versus 323.2 GTexel/s). It also has higher FP32 throughput at 13.11 TFLOPS versus 10.34 TFLOPS, and higher FP16 throughput at 26.21 TFLOPS versus 20.69 TFLOPS. The Vega card's base and boost clocks are higher, and it uses a 14 nm process compared to the GP100's 16 nm. Power consumption favors the NVIDIA card, which has a TDP of 235 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested 550 W PSU. The AMD card draws 300 W, needs two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 700 W PSU. Display outputs differ: the GP100 has 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Vega card has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The AMD card also has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the NVIDIA card has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 scores 87,445 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 14.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition's 76,111.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro GP100 has a 4096-bit memory bus delivering 732.2 GB/s, while the Vega Frontier Edition has a 2048-bit bus delivering 483.8 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has a 51.4% bandwidth advantage.

Q: What are the FP32 compute capabilities of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition achieves 13.11 TFLOPS FP32, which is higher than the Quadro GP100's 10.34 TFLOPS. The AMD card also leads in FP16 with 26.21 TFLOPS versus 20.69 TFLOPS.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 has a pixel rate of 138.5 GPixel/s, significantly higher than the AMD card's 102.4 GPixel/s, due to its larger ROP count of 96 versus 64.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Quadro GP100 has a TDP of 235 W with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested 550 W PSU. The Vega Frontier Edition has a TDP of 300 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 700 W PSU.

Q: Do these cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, with identical API version listings. The AMD card was also benchmarked in Metal, but the NVIDIA card has no Metal benchmark entry.