Radeon RX Vega Nano vs RX Vega 56

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking150not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation25.72no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameVega 10Vega 10
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date14 August 2017 (7 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$399 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 cores35844096
Core clock speed1156 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speed1471 MHz1546 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate329.5395.8
Floating-point processing power10.54 TFLOPSno data
ROPs6464
TMUs224256

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm152 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 8-pin

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 typeHBM2HBM2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1600 MBps
Memory bandwidth409.6 GB/s409.6 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.1251.3

Pros & cons summary


Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 175 Watt

RX Vega Nano has 20% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 56 and Radeon RX Vega Nano. We've got no test results to judge.


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

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 RX Vega 56
Radeon RX Vega 56
AMD Radeon RX Vega Nano
Radeon RX Vega Nano

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 755 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 56 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.