Radeon RX 6700 vs Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile with Radeon RX 6700, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3000 Mobile
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
24.18

RX 6700 outperforms RTX 3000 Mobile by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking26694
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency23.5420.06
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTU106Navi 22
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date27 May 2019 (7 years ago)9 June 2021 (5 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores23042304
Core clock speed945 MHz1941 MHz
Boost clock speed1380 MHz2450 MHz
Number of transistors10,800 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate198.7352.8
Floating-point processing power6.359 TFLOPS11.29 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs144144
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores3636
L0 Cacheno data576 KB
L1 Cache2.3 MB512 KB
L2 Cache4 MB3 MB
L3 Cacheno data80 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
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB10 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s320.0 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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-
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 3000 Mobile 24.18
RX 6700 45.08
+86.4%

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 3000 Mobile 10116
RX 6700 18859
+86.4%
Samples: 2050

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 HD95
−44.1%
170−180
4K88
−45%
160−170

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 65−70 120−130
+76.5%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140 250−260
+79.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 100−105
+85.2%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 55−60 100−105
+69.5%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 65−70 120−130
+76.5%
Battlefield 5 95−100 180−190
+85.6%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140 250−260
+79.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 100−105
+85.2%
Far Cry 5 80−85 150−160
+85.2%
Fortnite 120−130 220−230
+81.8%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100 180−190
+83.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 180−190
+85.6%
Valorant 160−170 300−310
+78.6%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 65−70 120−130
+76.5%
Battlefield 5 95−100 180−190
+85.6%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140 250−260
+79.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260 450−500
+73.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 100−105
+85.2%
Dota 2 132 240−250
+81.8%
Far Cry 5 80−85 150−160
+85.2%
Fortnite 120−130 220−230
+81.8%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100 180−190
+83.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90 160−170
+79.8%
Metro Exodus 55−60 100−105
+81.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 180−190
+85.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 109 200−210
+83.5%
Valorant 160−170 300−310
+78.6%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100 180−190
+85.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 100−105
+85.2%
Dota 2 121 220−230
+81.8%
Far Cry 5 80−85 150−160
+85.2%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100 180−190
+83.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 180−190
+85.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56 100−105
+78.6%
Valorant 160−170 300−310
+78.6%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130 220−230
+81.8%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55 100−105
+85.2%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180 300−310
+71.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50 85−90
+84.8%
Metro Exodus 30−35 60−65
+81.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 300−310
+71.4%
Valorant 190−200 350−400
+77.7%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70 120−130
+73.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 45−50
+80%
Far Cry 5 55−60 100−105
+75.4%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65 110−120
+71.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45 70−75
+75%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 60−65 110−120
+83.3%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 20−22 35−40
+75%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27 45−50
+80%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50 85−90
+80.9%
Metro Exodus 21−24 35−40
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40 65−70
+75.7%
Valorant 130−140 250−260
+79.9%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40 70−75
+84.2%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27 45−50
+80%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 18−20
+63.6%
Dota 2 88 160−170
+81.8%
Far Cry 5 27−30 50−55
+72.4%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 80−85
+86%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30 50−55
+85.2%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 27−30 50−55
+85.2%

This is how RTX 3000 Mobile and RX 6700 compete in popular games:

  • RX 6700 is 79% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6700 is 82% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.18 45.08
Recency 27 May 2019 9 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 10 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 175 Watt

RTX 3000 Mobile has 54% lower power consumption.

RX 6700, on the other hand, has a 86% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 67% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6700 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.


3.9 459 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1650 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile or Radeon RX 6700, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.