A800 SXM4 80 GB vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking156not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.27no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVega 10GA100
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)11 August 2022 (2 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 cores40966912
Core clock speed1250 MHz1275 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1410 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million54,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt400 Watt
Texture fill rate345.6609.1
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPS19.49 TFLOPS
ROPs64160
TMUs256432
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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
WidthIGPIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 amount16 GB80 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit5120 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz1593 MHz
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s2,039 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)N/A
Shader Model6.4N/A
OpenGL4.6N/A
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.1.125N/A
CUDA-8.0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 June 2017 11 August 2022
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 80 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 400 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has 60% lower power consumption.

A800 SXM4 80 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 400% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro Vega 64 and A800 SXM4 80 GB. 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 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
NVIDIA A800 SXM4 80 GB
A800 SXM4 80 GB

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.


4.3 19 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate A800 SXM4 80 GB 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.