RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation vs Radeon Pro Vega 20

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking373not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.53no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameVega 12AD106
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date14 November 2018 (5 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year 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 cores12804608
Core clock speed815 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed1283 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistorsno data22,900 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate102.6244.1
Floating-point processing power3.284 TFLOPS15.62 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs80144
Tensor Coresno data144
Ray Tracing Coresno data36

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
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width1024 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed740 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth189.4 GB/s256.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 November 2018 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 115 Watt

Pro Vega 20 has 15% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro Vega 20 and RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. We've got no test results to judge.


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 20
Radeon Pro Vega 20
NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation
RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation

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.


4 85 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 20 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 14 votes

Rate RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation 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.