FirePro A320 vs Radeon RX Vega XT
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) | TeraScale 3 (2010−2013) |
| GPU code name | Vega 10 | Trinity GL |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 8 August 2017 (7 years ago) | 6 June 2012 (12 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 cores | 4096 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1630 MHz | 955 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,303 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 417.3 | 22.92 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.7334 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 8 |
| TMUs | 256 | 24 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 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 | HBM2 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 2048 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1890 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 483.8 GB/s | no data |
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 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12.0 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 8 August 2017 | 6 June 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 100 Watt |
RX Vega XT has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
FirePro A320, on the other hand, has 125% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega XT and FirePro A320. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega XT is a desktop card while FirePro A320 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
