GRID A100A vs Radeon Pro Vega 16

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking392not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.51no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVega 12GA100
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date14 November 2018 (5 years ago)14 May 2020 (4 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 cores10246912
Core clock speed815 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHz1005 MHz
Number of transistorsno data54,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt400 Watt
Texture fill rate76.16434.2
Floating-point processing power2.437 TFLOPS13.89 TFLOPS
ROPs32192
TMUs64432
Tensor Coresno data432

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeHBM2HBM2e
Maximum RAM amount4 GB48 GB
Memory bus width1024 Bit6144 Bit
Memory clock speed1200 MHz1215 MHz
Memory bandwidth307.2 GB/s1,866 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA-8.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 November 2018 14 May 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 400 Watt

Pro Vega 16 has 433.3% lower power consumption.

GRID A100A, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro Vega 16 and GRID A100A. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 16 is a mobile workstation card while GRID A100A 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 Pro Vega 16
Radeon Pro Vega 16
NVIDIA GRID A100A
GRID A100A

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 10 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 16 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 9 votes

Rate GRID A100A 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.