RTX A400 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with RTX A400, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
9.00

RTX A400 outperforms RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking489373
Place by popularity28not in top-100
Power efficiency41.4019.25
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVegaGA107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a 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 cores512768
Core clock speedno data727 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHz1762 MHz
Number of transistorsno data8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data42.29
Floating-point processing powerno data2.706 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data24
Tensor Coresno data24
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data163 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data96 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 Connectorsno data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6

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 HD23
−52.2%
35−40
+52.2%
1440p17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
4K9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Elden Ring 18
−50%
27−30
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
−40%
21−24
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 32
−40.6%
45−50
+40.6%
Metro Exodus 27
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
−51.5%
50−55
+51.5%
Valorant 44
−47.7%
65−70
+47.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Dota 2 29
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%
Elden Ring 22
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
Far Cry 5 30
−50%
45−50
+50%
Fortnite 50−55
−50.9%
80−85
+50.9%
Forza Horizon 4 27
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Metro Exodus 19
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 57
−49.1%
85−90
+49.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12
−50%
18−20
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
Valorant 14
−50%
21−24
+50%
World of Tanks 48
−45.8%
70−75
+45.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Dota 2 48
−45.8%
70−75
+45.8%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%
Forza Horizon 4 23
−52.2%
35−40
+52.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−54.9%
110−120
+54.9%
Valorant 37
−48.6%
55−60
+48.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Elden Ring 12
−50%
18−20
+50%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
−36.4%
30−33
+36.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
World of Tanks 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 2
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−50%
24−27
+50%
Metro Exodus 17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Valorant 39
−53.8%
60−65
+53.8%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Dota 2 10
−40%
14−16
+40%
Elden Ring 6
−50%
9−10
+50%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
−40%
14−16
+40%
Metro Exodus 6
−50%
9−10
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
−40%
14−16
+40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 18
−50%
27−30
+50%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Fortnite 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Valorant 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and RTX A400 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A400 is 52% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A400 is 41% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A400 is 33% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.00 13.95
Recency 7 January 2020 16 April 2024
Chip lithography 7 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

RTX A400, on the other hand, has a 55% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 years.

The RTX A400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while RTX A400 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 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
NVIDIA RTX A400
RTX A400

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.


3.8 1258 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 16 votes

Rate RTX A400 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.