Radeon PRO W7700 vs GeForce RTX 4080

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 4080 with Radeon PRO W7700, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4080
2022, $1,199
16 GB GDDR6X, 320 Watt
82.30
+50.8%

RTX 4080 outperforms PRO W7700 by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking654
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation37.2631.50
Power efficiency20.0322.36
ArchitectureAda Lovelace (2022−2024)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameAD103Navi 32
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date20 September 2022 (4 years ago)13 November 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RTX 4080 has 18% better value for money than PRO W7700.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores97283072
Core clock speed2205 MHz1617 MHz
Boost clock speed2505 MHz2153 MHz
Number of transistors45,900 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)320 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate761.5413.4
Floating-point processing power48.74 TFLOPSno data
ROPs11296
TMUs304192
Tensor Cores304no data
Ray Tracing Cores7648
L0 Cacheno data768 KB
L1 Cache9.5 MB768 KB
L2 Cache64 MB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 MB

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 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length310 mm241 mm
Width3-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 16-pin1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR6XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth716.8 GB/s576.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a4x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.9
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.0
Vulkan1.31.4
CUDA8.9-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RTX 4080 82.30
+50.8%
PRO W7700 54.56

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RTX 4080 34434
+50.9%
Samples: 11520
PRO W7700 22825
Samples: 87

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD221
+57.9%
140−150
1440p153
+53%
100−110
4K10165−70
−35.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.43
+24%
7.14
1440p7.84
+21.6%
9.99
4K11.87
+22.8%
15.37
  • RTX 4080 has 24% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 4080 has 22% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 4080 has 23% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 240−250
+60.7%
150−160
Counter-Strike 2 300−350
+50.9%
220−230
Cyberpunk 2077 231
+54%
150−160
Resident Evil 4 Remake 291
+53.2%
190−200

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 227
+51.3%
150−160
Battlefield 5 190−200
+51.5%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 320
+52.4%
210−220
Cyberpunk 2077 231
+54%
150−160
Far Cry 5 223
+59.3%
140−150
Fortnite 300−350
+51%
200−210
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+56.4%
220−230
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+57.3%
110−120
Valorant 550−600
+59.4%
350−400

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 205
+57.7%
130−140
Battlefield 5 190−200
+51.5%
130−140
Counter-Strike 2 317
+51%
210−220
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+54.4%
180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 210
+61.5%
130−140
Dota 2 249
+55.6%
160−170
Far Cry 5 218
+55.7%
140−150
Fortnite 300−350
+51%
200−210
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+56.4%
220−230
Grand Theft Auto V 178
+61.8%
110−120
Metro Exodus 213
+52.1%
140−150
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+57.3%
110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 545
+55.7%
350−400
Valorant 550−600
+59.4%
350−400

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 190−200
+51.5%
130−140
Cyberpunk 2077 190
+58.3%
120−130
Dota 2 233
+55.3%
150−160
Far Cry 5 204
+56.9%
130−140
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+56.4%
220−230
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+57.3%
110−120
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 258
+51.8%
170−180
Valorant 575
+64.3%
350−400

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350
+51%
200−210

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 259
+52.4%
170−180
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+72%
300−310
Grand Theft Auto V 162
+62%
100−105
Metro Exodus 154
+54%
100−105
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+59.1%
110−120
Valorant 450−500
+61.7%
300−310

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 190−200
+63.3%
120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 129
+51.8%
85−90
Far Cry 5 201
+54.6%
130−140
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+53%
200−210
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 191
+59.2%
120−130

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+51%
100−105

4K
High

Atomic Heart 90−95
+63.6%
55−60
Counter-Strike 2 107
+52.9%
70−75
Grand Theft Auto V 185
+54.2%
120−130
Metro Exodus 104
+60%
65−70
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 187
+55.8%
120−130
Valorant 300−350
+51.4%
210−220

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+51.1%
90−95
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+58.8%
80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 63
+57.5%
40−45
Dota 2 227
+51.3%
150−160
Far Cry 5 140
+55.6%
90−95
Forza Horizon 4 290−300
+56.8%
190−200
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+60%
60−65

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+58%
50−55

This is how RTX 4080 and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4080 is 58% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4080 is 53% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4080 is 55% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 82.30 54.56
Recency 20 September 2022 13 November 2023
Power consumption (TDP) 320 Watt 190 Watt

RTX 4080 has a 51% higher aggregate performance score.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 41% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 4080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO W7700 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 4080 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 5596 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4080 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 13 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 4080 or Radeon PRO W7700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.