AMD Radeon Pro V520 vs NVIDIA TITAN RTX
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro V520 and NVIDIA TITAN RTX videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro V520
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 12 nm
- Around 24% lower typical power consumption: 225 Watt vs 280 Watt
- 4.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 16807 vs 3707
- 4.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 16807 vs 3707
- 11.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 37642 vs 3353
- 11.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 37642 vs 3353
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 Dec 2020 vs 18 December 2018 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 12 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt vs 280 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 16807 vs 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 16807 vs 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 37642 vs 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 37642 vs 3353 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA TITAN RTX
- Around 35% higher core clock speed: 1350 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- Around 11% higher boost clock speed: 1770 MHz vs 1600 MHz
- 2x more pipelines: 4608 vs 2304
- 14x more memory clock speed: 14000 MHz vs 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective)
- Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 840 vs 525
- Around 66% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 20362 vs 12258
- Around 95% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 25820 vs 13220
- Around 95% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 25820 vs 13220
- 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 138072 vs 62815
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1350 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1770 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
| Pipelines | 4608 vs 2304 |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz vs 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 840 vs 525 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 20362 vs 12258 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 25820 vs 13220 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 25820 vs 13220 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 138072 vs 62815 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro V520
GPU 2: NVIDIA TITAN RTX
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro V520 | NVIDIA TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 525 | 840 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12258 | 20362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13220 | 25820 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13220 | 25820 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 16807 | 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 16807 | 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 37642 | 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 37642 | 3353 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 62815 | 138072 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3794 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro V520 | NVIDIA TITAN RTX | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Turing |
| Code name | Navi 12 | TU102 |
| Launch date | 1 Dec 2020 | 18 December 2018 |
| Place in performance rating | 68 | 109 |
| Type | Server | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,499 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1600 MHz | 1770 MHz |
| Compute units | 36 | |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 460.8 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 7.373 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 4608 |
| Pixel fill rate | 102.4 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 230.4 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | 280 Watt |
| Transistor count | 18,600 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
| DisplayPort count | 3 | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 267 mm |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 550 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 2x 8-pin |
| Width | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| OpenCL | 2.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 512 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 2048 bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 14000 MHz |
| Memory type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |