Radeon Pro V320 vs RX Vega 64 Nano

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameVega 10Vega 10
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date1 October 2017 (7 years ago)29 June 2017 (7 years 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 cores40963584
Core clock speed1156 MHz852 MHz
Boost clock speed1247 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt230 Watt
Texture fill rate319.2336.0
Floating-point processing powerno data10.75 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs256224

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
Length152 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin2x 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 speed1600 MHz945 MHz
Memory bandwidth409.6 GB/s483.8 GB/s

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 DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12.012 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan-1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 October 2017 29 June 2017
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 230 Watt

RX Vega 64 Nano has an age advantage of 3 months.

Pro V320, on the other hand, has 8.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano and Radeon Pro V320. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano is a desktop card while Radeon Pro V320 is a workstation one.


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 64 Nano
Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano
AMD Radeon Pro V320
Radeon Pro V320

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.


4.8 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon Pro V320 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.