RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Radeon Pro Vega 16

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 16 with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 16
2018
4 GB HBM2, 75 Watt
12.03

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms Pro Vega 16 by a whopping 262% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking41285
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data91.25
Power efficiency11.3443.95
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameVega 12AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date14 November 2018 (6 years ago)12 February 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores10242816
Core clock speed815 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate76.16187.4
Floating-point processing power2.437 TFLOPS12 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs6488
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width1024 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1200 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth307.2 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

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.

Pro Vega 16 12.03
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 43.51
+262%

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.

Pro Vega 16 4809
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 17396
+262%

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.

Pro Vega 16 22421
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 84750
+278%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 16 21832
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 81862
+275%

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 HD59
−256%
210−220
+256%
4K38
−242%
130−140
+242%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.09
4Kno data4.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
−259%
230−240
+259%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−254%
85−90
+254%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
−257%
75−80
+257%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−253%
180−190
+253%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
−259%
230−240
+259%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−254%
85−90
+254%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Fortnite 65−70
−248%
240−250
+248%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−260%
180−190
+260%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−251%
130−140
+251%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
−257%
75−80
+257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−257%
150−160
+257%
Valorant 100−110
−237%
350−400
+237%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−253%
180−190
+253%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
−259%
230−240
+259%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
−257%
600−650
+257%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−254%
85−90
+254%
Dota 2 75
−260%
270−280
+260%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Fortnite 65−70
−248%
240−250
+248%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−260%
180−190
+260%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−251%
130−140
+251%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
−256%
160−170
+256%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
−257%
75−80
+257%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−254%
85−90
+254%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−257%
150−160
+257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
−233%
100−105
+233%
Valorant 100−110
−237%
350−400
+237%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−253%
180−190
+253%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−254%
85−90
+254%
Dota 2 72
−261%
260−270
+261%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−260%
180−190
+260%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
−257%
75−80
+257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−257%
150−160
+257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
−252%
95−100
+252%
Valorant 100−110
−237%
350−400
+237%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
−248%
240−250
+248%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−241%
75−80
+241%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
−241%
300−310
+241%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−261%
65−70
+261%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−230%
300−310
+230%
Valorant 120−130
−254%
450−500
+254%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−255%
110−120
+255%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−260%
90−95
+260%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−257%
100−105
+257%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
−233%
40−45
+233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−253%
60−65
+253%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
−260%
90−95
+260%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−248%
80−85
+248%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−233%
50−55
+233%
Valorant 60−65
−255%
220−230
+255%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−244%
55−60
+244%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−250%
14−16
+250%
Dota 2 38
−242%
130−140
+242%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−233%
40−45
+233%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−250%
70−75
+250%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%

This is how Pro Vega 16 and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 256% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 242% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.03 43.51
Recency 14 November 2018 12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 261.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 7.1% lower power consumption.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 16 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 16 is a mobile workstation card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Radeon Pro Vega 16
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 12 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 16 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 40 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro Vega 16 or RTX 2000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.