AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
- 2.6x more core clock speed: 1574 MHz vs 600 MHz
- Around 42% higher boost clock speed: 1720 MHz vs 1215 MHz
- 2.5x more texture fill rate: 440.3 GTexel/s vs 175.0 GTexel/s
- 3.6x more pipelines: 8192 vs 2304
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 12 nm
- 10.7x more maximum memory size: 64 GB vs 6 GB
- Around 44% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 98389 vs 68305
- Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14208 vs 10140
- Around 40% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14208 vs 10140
- 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 917 vs 343
- Around 91% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 15977 vs 8366
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | Dec 2019 vs 27 May 2019 |
Core clock speed | 1574 MHz vs 600 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1720 MHz vs 1215 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 440.3 GTexel/s vs 175.0 GTexel/s |
Pipelines | 8192 vs 2304 |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 12 nm |
Maximum memory size | 64 GB vs 6 GB |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 98389 vs 68305 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14208 vs 10140 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14208 vs 10140 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 vs 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 vs 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 vs 3351 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 vs 3351 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 917 vs 343 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 15977 vs 8366 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
- 7.9x lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 475 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 475 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 98389 | 68305 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14208 | 10140 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14208 | 10140 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 | 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 | 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3351 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3351 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 917 | 343 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 15977 | 8366 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 220.867 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2046.214 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.026 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.532 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 645.647 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 5.1 | Turing |
Code name | Vega 20 | TU106 |
Launch date | Dec 2019 | 27 May 2019 |
Place in performance rating | 159 | 325 |
Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1720 MHz | 1215 MHz |
Compute units | 64 | |
Core clock speed | 1574 MHz | 600 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 880.6 GFLOPS (1:16) | 175.0 GFLOPS |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 28.18 TFLOPS (2:1) | 11.20 TFLOPS |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 14.09 TFLOPS | 5.599 TFLOPS |
Pipelines | 8192 | 2304 |
Pixel fill rate | 110.1 GPixel/s | 77.76 GPixel/s |
Texture fill rate | 440.3 GTexel/s | 175.0 GTexel/s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 475 Watt | 60 Watt |
Transistor count | 13230 million | 10800 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x HDMI, 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 850 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Width | Dual-slot | IGP |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
High bandwidth memory (HBM) | ||
Maximum RAM amount | 64 GB | 6 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 825.3 GB/s | 448 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 4096 bit | 256 bit |
Memory clock speed | 1612 MHz | |
Memory type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
Technologies |
||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) |