Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs RX Vega 64

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 64 with Radeon Pro Vega 16, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 64
2017
8 GB HBM2, 295 Watt
37.04
+196%

RX Vega 64 outperforms Pro Vega 16 by a whopping 196% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking128399
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation22.28no data
Power efficiency8.6611.51
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameVega 10Vega 12
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date7 August 2017 (7 years ago)14 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 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 cores40961024
Core clock speed1247 MHz815 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz1190 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate395.876.16
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPS2.437 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs25664

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno 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 typeHBM2HBM2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit1024 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s307.2 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 DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.1.1251.2.131

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 64 37.04
+196%
Pro Vega 16 12.51

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 64 14241
+196%
Pro Vega 16 4809

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 64 30824
+192%
Pro Vega 16 10569

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 64 22501
+191%
Pro Vega 16 7745

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 64 127374
+126%
Pro Vega 16 56273

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 HD118
+107%
57
−107%
1440p80
+196%
27−30
−196%
4K52
+36.8%
38
−36.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.23no data
1440p6.24no data
4K9.60no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+245%
21−24
−245%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+229%
24−27
−229%
Elden Ring 120−130
+249%
35−40
−249%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 82
+100%
40−45
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+245%
21−24
−245%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Forza Horizon 4 202
+304%
50−55
−304%
Metro Exodus 105
+209%
30−35
−209%
Red Dead Redemption 2 116
+263%
30−35
−263%
Valorant 182
+271%
45−50
−271%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 174
+324%
40−45
−324%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+245%
21−24
−245%
Cyberpunk 2077 27
+12.5%
24−27
−12.5%
Dota 2 50
+100%
25
−100%
Elden Ring 120−130
+249%
35−40
−249%
Far Cry 5 62
+40.9%
44
−40.9%
Fortnite 123
+73.2%
70−75
−73.2%
Forza Horizon 4 164
+228%
50−55
−228%
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
+160%
45−50
−160%
Metro Exodus 79
+132%
30−35
−132%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 190−200
+111%
90−95
−111%
Red Dead Redemption 2 57
+78.1%
30−35
−78.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140
+242%
35−40
−242%
Valorant 92
+87.8%
45−50
−87.8%
World of Tanks 270−280
+63.2%
170−180
−63.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 72
+75.6%
40−45
−75.6%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
+245%
21−24
−245%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 138
+91.7%
72
−91.7%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+95.8%
45−50
−95.8%
Forza Horizon 4 143
+186%
50−55
−186%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 190−200
+111%
90−95
−111%
Valorant 140
+186%
45−50
−186%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 65−70
+300%
16−18
−300%
Elden Ring 70−75
+311%
18−20
−311%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+300%
16−18
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+116%
80−85
−116%
Red Dead Redemption 2 37
+236%
10−12
−236%
World of Tanks 230−240
+164%
85−90
−164%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+180%
24−27
−180%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+200%
12−14
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+310%
27−30
−310%
Forza Horizon 4 100
+245%
27−30
−245%
Metro Exodus 79
+204%
24−27
−204%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+320%
14−16
−320%
Valorant 95
+206%
30−35
−206%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%
Dota 2 70−75
+209%
21−24
−209%
Elden Ring 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+209%
21−24
−209%
Metro Exodus 46
+475%
8−9
−475%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+222%
35−40
−222%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24
+200%
8−9
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+209%
21−24
−209%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+327%
10−12
−327%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+443%
7−8
−443%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+133%
3−4
−133%
Dota 2 96
+153%
38
−153%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+260%
14−16
−260%
Fortnite 50
+257%
14−16
−257%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+247%
16−18
−247%
Valorant 49
+277%
12−14
−277%

This is how RX Vega 64 and Pro Vega 16 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 64 is 107% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 64 is 196% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 64 is 37% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 64 is 475% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega 64 is ahead in 62 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 37.04 12.51
Recency 7 August 2017 14 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 75 Watt

RX Vega 64 has a 196.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro Vega 16, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 293.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 16 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 64 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro Vega 16 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.

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
Radeon RX Vega 64
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16
Radeon Pro Vega 16

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.


4.3 723 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 11 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 16 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.