Radeon Pro Vega 64X vs TITAN RTX

Place in the ranking	67	149
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.11	no data
Power efficiency	12.05	9.56
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code name	TU102	Vega 10
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	18 December 2018 (6 years ago)	19 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores	4608	4096
Core clock speed	1350 MHz	1250 MHz
Boost clock speed	1770 MHz	1468 MHz
Number of transistors	18,600 million	12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	280 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	509.8	375.8
Floating-point processing power	16.31 TFLOPS	12.03 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	64
TMUs	288	256
Tensor Cores	576	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	72	no data

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 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	None

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	GDDR6	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	2048 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	672.0 GB/s	512.0 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.125
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

TITAN RTX 47.76
+41.1%

Pro Vega 64X 33.86

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.

TITAN RTX 18858
+41.1%

Pro Vega 64X 13369

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

TITAN RTX 148699
+89.3%

Pro Vega 64X 78565

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 HD	162 +47.3%	110−120 −47.3%
1440p	103 +47.1%	70−75 −47.1%
4K	73 +46%	50−55 −46%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	15.43	no data
1440p	24.26	no data
4K	34.23	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	166 +50.9%	110−120 −50.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 +43.6%	55−60 −43.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	85 +41.7%	60−65 −41.7%
Counter-Strike 2	141 +48.4%	95−100 −48.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	91 +51.7%	60−65 −51.7%
Forza Horizon 4	351 +46.3%	240−250 −46.3%
Forza Horizon 5	179 +49.2%	120−130 −49.2%
Metro Exodus	135 +42.1%	95−100 −42.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	127 +41.1%	90−95 −41.1%
Valorant	246 +44.7%	170−180 −44.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	205 +46.4%	140−150 −46.4%
Counter-Strike 2	120 +41.2%	85−90 −41.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	86 +43.3%	60−65 −43.3%
Dota 2	153 +53%	100−105 −53%
Far Cry 5	104 +48.6%	70−75 −48.6%
Fortnite	185 +42.3%	130−140 −42.3%
Forza Horizon 4	286 +43%	200−210 −43%
Forza Horizon 5	144 +44%	100−105 −44%
Grand Theft Auto V	152 +52%	100−105 −52%
Metro Exodus	118 +47.5%	80−85 −47.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	248 +45.9%	170−180 −45.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	93 +43.1%	65−70 −43.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +45%	120−130 −45%
Valorant	171 +42.5%	120−130 −42.5%
World of Tanks	270−280 +46.8%	190−200 −46.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75 +50%	50−55 −50%
Counter-Strike 2	110 +46.7%	75−80 −46.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	80 +45.5%	55−60 −45.5%
Dota 2	148 +48%	100−105 −48%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +45.3%	75−80 −45.3%
Forza Horizon 4	242 +42.4%	170−180 −42.4%
Forza Horizon 5	143 +43%	100−105 −43%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	192 +47.7%	130−140 −47.7%
Valorant	236 +47.5%	160−170 −47.5%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	114 +42.5%	80−85 −42.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	114 +42.5%	80−85 −42.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +45.8%	120−130 −45.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	63 +57.5%	40−45 −57.5%
World of Tanks	300−350 +42.3%	220−230 −42.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +49.1%	55−60 −49.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	62 +55%	40−45 −55%
Far Cry 5	150−160 +54%	100−105 −54%
Forza Horizon 4	183 +52.5%	120−130 −52.5%
Forza Horizon 5	100 +42.9%	70−75 −42.9%
Metro Exodus	114 +42.5%	80−85 −42.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 +44.6%	65−70 −44.6%
Valorant	192 +47.7%	130−140 −47.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +50%	16−18 −50%
Dota 2	134 +41.1%	95−100 −41.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	134 +41.1%	95−100 −41.1%
Metro Exodus	55 +57.1%	35−40 −57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	197 +51.5%	130−140 −51.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	41 +51.9%	27−30 −51.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	134 +41.1%	95−100 −41.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75 +50%	50−55 −50%
Counter-Strike 2	18 +50%	12−14 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%
Dota 2	146 +46%	100−105 −46%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +45.5%	55−60 −45.5%
Fortnite	90 +50%	60−65 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	109 +45.3%	75−80 −45.3%
Forza Horizon 5	60 +50%	40−45 −50%
Valorant	105 +50%	70−75 −50%

This is how TITAN RTX and Pro Vega 64X compete in popular games:

TITAN RTX is 47% faster in 1080p
TITAN RTX is 47% faster in 1440p
TITAN RTX is 46% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	47.76	33.86
Recency	18 December 2018	19 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	280 Watt	250 Watt