Radeon Pro Vega 64X vs GeForce RTX 3090

Place in the ranking	25	147
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	14.96	no data
Power efficiency	13.67	9.58
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2024)	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code name	GA102	Vega 10
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 September 2020 (4 years ago)	19 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,499	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	10496	4096
Core clock speed	1395 MHz	1250 MHz
Boost clock speed	1695 MHz	1468 MHz
Number of transistors	28,300 million	12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	350 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	556.0	375.8
Floating-point processing power	35.58 TFLOPS	12.03 TFLOPS
ROPs	112	64
TMUs	328	256
Tensor Cores	328	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	82	no data

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	PCIe 4.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	336 mm	no data
Width	3-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 12-pin	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	GDDR6X	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	2048 Bit
Memory clock speed	1219 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	936.2 GB/s	512.0 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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.0
Vulkan	1.2	1.1.125
CUDA	8.5	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RTX 3090 69.51
+99.8%

Pro Vega 64X 34.79

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RTX 3090 26713
+99.8%

Pro Vega 64X 13369

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

RTX 3090 191364
+144%

Pro Vega 64X 78565

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	198 +108%	95−100 −108%
1440p	128 +113%	60−65 −113%
4K	87 +118%	40−45 −118%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	7.57	no data
1440p	11.71	no data
4K	17.23	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	220 +100%	110−120 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	207 +107%	100−105 −107%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	102 +104%	50−55 −104%
Counter-Strike 2	188 +109%	90−95 −109%
Cyberpunk 2077	151 +101%	75−80 −101%
Forza Horizon 4	505 +102%	250−260 −102%
Forza Horizon 5	184 +104%	90−95 −104%
Metro Exodus	169 +111%	80−85 −111%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130 +100%	65−70 −100%
Valorant	393 +107%	190−200 −107%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +113%	55−60 −113%
Counter-Strike 2	161 +101%	80−85 −101%
Cyberpunk 2077	135 +108%	65−70 −108%
Dota 2	186 +107%	90−95 −107%
Far Cry 5	147 +110%	70−75 −110%
Fortnite	270−280 +110%	130−140 −110%
Forza Horizon 4	402 +101%	200−210 −101%
Forza Horizon 5	182 +102%	90−95 −102%
Grand Theft Auto V	171 +101%	85−90 −101%
Metro Exodus	150 +100%	75−80 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +115%	100−105 −115%
Red Dead Redemption 2	132 +103%	65−70 −103%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +105%	85−90 −105%
Valorant	222 +102%	110−120 −102%
World of Tanks	270−280 +115%	130−140 −115%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	95 +111%	45−50 −111%
Counter-Strike 2	146 +109%	70−75 −109%
Cyberpunk 2077	121 +102%	60−65 −102%
Dota 2	213 +113%	100−105 −113%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +102%	65−70 −102%
Forza Horizon 4	351 +106%	170−180 −106%
Forza Horizon 5	159 +112%	75−80 −112%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +115%	100−105 −115%
Valorant	296 +111%	140−150 −111%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +100%	16−18 −100%
Dota 2	150 +100%	75−80 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	150 +100%	75−80 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +106%	85−90 −106%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 +104%	45−50 −104%
World of Tanks	450−500 +103%	240−250 −103%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	91 +102%	45−50 −102%
Cyberpunk 2077	87 +118%	40−45 −118%
Far Cry 5	160−170 +100%	80−85 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	266 +105%	130−140 −105%
Forza Horizon 5	134 +106%	65−70 −106%
Metro Exodus	139 +114%	65−70 −114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	152 +103%	75−80 −103%
Valorant	295 +111%	140−150 −111%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +110%	21−24 −110%
Dota 2	182 +102%	90−95 −102%
Grand Theft Auto V	182 +102%	90−95 −102%
Metro Exodus	76 +117%	35−40 −117%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +109%	100−105 −109%
Red Dead Redemption 2	64 +113%	30−33 −113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	182 +102%	90−95 −102%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	91 +102%	45−50 −102%
Counter-Strike 2	22 +120%	10−11 −120%
Cyberpunk 2077	45 +114%	21−24 −114%
Dota 2	202 +102%	100−105 −102%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +110%	50−55 −110%
Fortnite	95−100 +113%	45−50 −113%
Forza Horizon 4	159 +112%	75−80 −112%
Forza Horizon 5	83 +108%	40−45 −108%
Valorant	188 +109%	90−95 −109%

This is how RTX 3090 and Pro Vega 64X compete in popular games:

RTX 3090 is 108% faster in 1080p
RTX 3090 is 113% faster in 1440p
RTX 3090 is 118% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	69.51	34.79
Recency	1 September 2020	19 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	8 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	350 Watt	250 Watt

RTX 3090 has a 99.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

Pro Vega 64X, on the other hand, has 40% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 64X in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3090 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro Vega 64X is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.