Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB vs Quadro 3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking901not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency2.49no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameGF104Navi 31
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date22 February 2011 (15 years ago)13 April 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$398.96 $2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores2404480
Core clock speed450 MHz1895 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2525 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt281 Watt
Texture fill rate18.00707.0
Floating-point processing power0.432 TFLOPS45.25 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs40280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70
L0 Cacheno data2.2 MB
L1 Cache320 KB2 MB
L2 Cache512 KB6 MB
L3 Cacheno data96 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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB48 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed625 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s864.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 February 2011 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 281 Watt

Quadro 3000M has 275% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800 48 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro 3000M and Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro 3000M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB 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.


3.8 51 votes

Rate Quadro 3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 6 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 3000M or Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.