Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs Apple M1 8-Core GPU
Aggregate performance score
We've compared M1 8-Core GPU with Radeon Pro Vega 64, including specs and performance data.
Pro Vega 64 outperforms Apple M1 8-Core GPU by a whopping 146% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 402 | 182 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.13 |
| Architecture | no data | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | no data | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 10 November 2020 (4 years ago) | 27 June 2017 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 4096 |
| Core clock speed | 1278 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1350 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 345.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 11.06 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 256 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | no data | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 786 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 402.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.125 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 28
−132%
| 65−70
+132%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
−139%
|
170−180
+139%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−131%
|
60−65
+131%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−139%
|
55−60
+139%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
−132%
|
130−140
+132%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
−139%
|
170−180
+139%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−131%
|
60−65
+131%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
−138%
|
100−105
+138%
|
| Fortnite | 70−75
−143%
|
180−190
+143%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
−141%
|
130−140
+141%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 40−45
−138%
|
95−100
+138%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−139%
|
55−60
+139%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
−139%
|
110−120
+139%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
−145%
|
270−280
+145%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
−132%
|
130−140
+132%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
−139%
|
170−180
+139%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 170−180
−123%
|
400−450
+123%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−131%
|
60−65
+131%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
−138%
|
200−210
+138%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
−138%
|
100−105
+138%
|
| Fortnite | 70−75
−143%
|
180−190
+143%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
−141%
|
130−140
+141%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 40−45
−138%
|
95−100
+138%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 45−50
−129%
|
110−120
+129%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−139%
|
55−60
+139%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
−131%
|
60−65
+131%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
−139%
|
110−120
+139%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
−142%
|
80−85
+142%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
−145%
|
270−280
+145%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
−132%
|
130−140
+132%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−131%
|
60−65
+131%
|
| Dota 2 | 80−85
−138%
|
200−210
+138%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
−138%
|
100−105
+138%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
−141%
|
130−140
+141%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
−139%
|
55−60
+139%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
−139%
|
110−120
+139%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
−142%
|
80−85
+142%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
−145%
|
270−280
+145%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 70−75
−143%
|
180−190
+143%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
−129%
|
55−60
+129%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 95−100
−142%
|
230−240
+142%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
−125%
|
45−50
+125%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−110
−145%
|
250−260
+145%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
−121%
|
300−310
+121%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−143%
|
85−90
+143%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
−145%
|
27−30
+145%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
−132%
|
65−70
+132%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
−142%
|
75−80
+142%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
−137%
|
45−50
+137%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 27−30
−132%
|
65−70
+132%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−125%
|
18−20
+125%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
−129%
|
55−60
+129%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
−133%
|
21−24
+133%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
−132%
|
160−170
+132%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
−122%
|
40−45
+122%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−125%
|
18−20
+125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
−139%
|
110−120
+139%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−127%
|
50−55
+127%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 12−14
−125%
|
27−30
+125%
|
This is how Apple M1 8-Core GPU and Pro Vega 64 compete in popular games:
- Pro Vega 64 is 132% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.42 | 30.59 |
| Recency | 10 November 2020 | 27 June 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
Apple M1 8-Core GPU has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
Pro Vega 64, on the other hand, has a 146.3% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the M1 8-Core GPU in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M1 8-Core GPU is a notebook card while Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
