RTX A40 vs Radeon RX Vega Nano

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVega 10GA102
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)5 October 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 cores409610752
Core clock speed1200 MHz1305 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz1755 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)175 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate395.8589.7
Floating-point processing powerno data37.74 TFLOPS
ROPs64112
TMUs256336
Tensor Coresno data336
Ray Tracing Coresno data84

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
Length152 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin8-pin EPS

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 amount8 GB48 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MBps1812 MHz
Memory bandwidth409.6 GB/s695.8 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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a3x DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.12.0
Vulkan1.31.2
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 175 Watt 300 Watt

RX Vega Nano has 71.4% lower power consumption.

RTX A40, on the other hand, has a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega Nano and RTX A40. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega Nano is a desktop card while RTX A40 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 RX Vega Nano
Radeon RX Vega Nano
NVIDIA RTX A40
RTX A40

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.


3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.4 394 votes

Rate RTX A40 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.