RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon RX Vega 10

Place in the ranking	688	40
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	29.31	26.94
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Raven	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	8 January 2019 (6 years ago)	21 March 2023 (1 year 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	640	7424
Core clock speed	300 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1301 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,940 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	150 Watt (60 - 150 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	52.04	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.665 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	no data
TMUs	40	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).

Laptop size	no data	large
Interface	IGP	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

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	System Shared	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	12 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	16000 MHz
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 outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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.

RX Vega 10 4.25

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 58.61
+1279%

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.

RX Vega 10 1632

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 22526
+1280%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX Vega 10 3389

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 54921
+1521%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX Vega 10 2272

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 40179
+1668%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

RX Vega 10 737

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 16308
+2113%

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

−1253%

230−240
+1253%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 −1233%	160−170 +1233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	11 −1264%	150−160 +1264%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Forza Horizon 4	17 −1253%	230−240 +1253%
Forza Horizon 5	14 −1257%	190−200 +1257%
Metro Exodus	12 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
Red Dead Redemption 2	19 −1268%	260−270 +1268%
Valorant	22 −1264%	300−310 +1264%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Counter-Strike 2	7 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Cyberpunk 2077	2 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Dota 2	18 −1233%	240−250 +1233%
Far Cry 5	17 −1253%	230−240 +1253%
Fortnite	15 −1233%	200−210 +1233%
Forza Horizon 4	14 −1257%	190−200 +1257%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Grand Theft Auto V	10 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Metro Exodus	6 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	48 −1254%	650−700 +1254%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −1257%	190−200 +1257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −1257%	190−200 +1257%
Valorant	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
World of Tanks	42 −1210%	550−600 +1210%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Dota 2	29 −1107%	350−400 +1107%
Far Cry 5	19 −1268%	260−270 +1268%
Forza Horizon 4	12 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −1251%	500−550 +1251%
Valorant	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −1107%	350−400 +1107%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
World of Tanks	30−33 −1233%	400−450 +1233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −1233%	80−85 +1233%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Valorant	12−14 −1233%	160−170 +1233%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Dota 2	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −1233%	160−170 +1233%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Dota 2	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%
Fortnite	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Valorant	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%

This is how RX Vega 10 and RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is 1253% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.25	58.61
Recency	8 January 2019	21 March 2023
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	150 Watt

RX Vega 10 has 1400% lower power consumption.

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 1279.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 10 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 10 is a notebook graphics card while RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 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.