Radeon 890M vs Pro Vega II Duo

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega II Duo with Radeon 890M, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega II Duo
2019, $4,399
32 GB HBM2, 475 Watt
33.52
+71.7%

Pro II Duo outperforms 890M by an impressive 72% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking172313
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.51no data
Power efficiency5.42100.00
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025)
GPU code nameVega 20Strix Point
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 June 2019 (6 years ago)15 July 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores4096 ×21024
Core clock speed1400 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1720 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors13,230 million34,000 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)475 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate440.3 ×2185.6
Floating-point processing power14.09 TFLOPS ×25.939 TFLOPS
ROPs64 ×232
TMUs256 ×264
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L0 Cacheno data256 KB
L1 Cache1 MB256 KB
L2 Cache4 MB2 MB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceApple MPXPCIe 4.0 x8
WidthQuad-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount32 GB ×2System Shared
Memory bus width4096 Bit ×2System Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth1.02 TB/s ×2no data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI 2.0b, 4x ThunderboltPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.1
Vulkan1.31.3

Synthetic benchmarks

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 II Duo 33.52
+71.7%
Radeon 890M 19.52

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 II Duo 14018
+71.7%
Samples: 2
Radeon 890M 8165
Samples: 1592

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 HD70−75
+66.7%
42
−66.7%
1440p30−35
+66.7%
18
−66.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p62.84no data
1440p146.63no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 117
+0%
117
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 91
+0%
91
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 57
+0%
57
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 77
+0%
77
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 53
+0%
53
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 25
+0%
25
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+0%
53
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 19
+0%
19
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+0%
34
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how Pro Vega II Duo and Radeon 890M compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega II Duo is 67% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega II Duo is 67% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.52 19.52
Recency 3 June 2019 15 July 2024
Chip lithography 7 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 475 Watt 15 Watt

Pro Vega II Duo has a 71.7% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 890M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 3066.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega II Duo is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 890M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega II Duo is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 890M is a notebook 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 II Duo
Radeon Pro Vega II Duo
AMD Radeon 890M
Radeon 890M

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.


3.9 183 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 289 votes

Rate Radeon 890M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro Vega II Duo or Radeon 890M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.