Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB vs Quadro 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 4000 with Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 4000
2010, $1,199
2 GB GDDR5, 142 Watt
3.51
RX 9060 XT 16 GB
2025, $349
16 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
48.10
+1270%

9060 XT 16 GB outperforms 4000 by a whopping 1270% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking79277
Place by popularitynot in top-10032
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0883.38
Power efficiency1.9323.43
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 4.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameGF100Navi 44
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date2 November 2010 (15 years ago)4 June 2025 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 104125% better value for money than Quadro 4000.

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 cores2562048
Core clock speed475 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data3130 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million29,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)142 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate15.20400.6
Floating-point processing power0.4864 TFLOPS25.64 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs32128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cache512 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 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 2.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed702 MHz2518 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.86 GB/s322.3 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 DVI, 2x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a
HDMI-+

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
CUDA2.0-

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.

Quadro 4000 3.51
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 48.10
+1270%

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.

Quadro 4000 1469
Samples: 2308
RX 9060 XT 16 GB 20123
+1270%
Samples: 9572

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 HD10−12157
+1470%
1440p5−670
+1300%
4K3−443
+1333%

Cost per frame, $

1080p119.902.22
+98.1%
1440p239.804.99
+97.9%
4K399.678.12
+98%
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 98% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 98% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB has 98% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Hogwarts Legacy 203 203
Resident Evil 4 Remake 130−140 130−140

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 270 270
Fortnite 200−210 200−210
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
Hogwarts Legacy 157 157
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 248 248
Fortnite 200−210 200−210
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
Grand Theft Auto V 154 154
Hogwarts Legacy 119 119
Metro Exodus 120−130 120−130
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 273 273
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160 150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120 110−120
Far Cry 5 233 233
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
Hogwarts Legacy 91 91
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146 146

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 200−210 200−210

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350 300−350
Grand Theft Auto V 83 83
Metro Exodus 75−80 75−80
Valorant 300−350 300−350

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65 60−65
Far Cry 5 160 160
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
Hogwarts Legacy 68 68
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102 102

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 130−140 130−140

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65 60−65
Grand Theft Auto V 91 91
Metro Exodus 45−50 45−50
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84 84
Valorant 290−300 290−300

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30 27−30
Far Cry 5 80 80
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 100−110
Hogwarts Legacy 36 36
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80 75−80

4K
Epic

Fortnite 70−75 70−75

This is how Quadro 4000 and RX 9060 XT 16 GB compete in popular games:

  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 1470% faster in 1080p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 1300% faster in 1440p
  • RX 9060 XT 16 GB is 1333% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.51 48.10
Recency 2 November 2010 4 June 2025
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 142 Watt 160 Watt

Quadro 4000 has 11% lower power consumption.

RX 9060 XT 16 GB, on the other hand, has a 1270% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 90% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is a desktop 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.


3.5 203 votes

Rate Quadro 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2073 votes

Rate Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 4000 or Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.