Radeon RX 6800 XT vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with Radeon RX 6800 XT, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018, $899
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
35.48
RX 6800 XT
2020, $649
16 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
60.01
+69.1%

6800 XT outperforms RTX 4000 by an impressive 69% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking16143
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.8639.59
Power efficiency17.2715.58
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTU104Navi 21
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date13 November 2018 (7 years ago)28 October 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 $649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RX 6800 XT has 265% better value for money than RTX 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 cores23044608
Core clock speed1005 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHz2250 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate222.5648.0
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS20.74 TFLOPS
ROPs64128
TMUs144288
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores3672
L0 Cacheno data1.1 MB
L1 Cache2.3 MB1 MB
L2 Cache4 MB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin2x 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 amount8 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
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 Model6.86.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.31.2
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 4000 35.48
RX 6800 XT 60.01
+69.1%

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 4000 14844
Samples: 2794
RX 6800 XT 25108
+69.1%
Samples: 8048

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 HD110−120195
+77.3%
1440p80−85
−42%
138
4K50−5592
+84%

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.173.33
+59.3%
1440p11.244.70
+58.1%
4K17.987.05
+60.8%
  • RX 6800 XT has 59% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RX 6800 XT has 58% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RX 6800 XT has 61% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 290−300 290−300
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Resident Evil 4 Remake 180−190 180−190

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 180−190 180−190
Battlefield 5 191 191
Counter-Strike 2 290−300 290−300
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Far Cry 5 143 143
Fortnite 280−290 280−290
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 230−240
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 180−190 180−190
Battlefield 5 183 183
Counter-Strike 2 290−300 290−300
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Dota 2 166 166
Far Cry 5 139 139
Fortnite 280−290 280−290
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 230−240
Grand Theft Auto V 150 150
Metro Exodus 152 152
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 294 294
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 175 175
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 150−160
Dota 2 145 145
Far Cry 5 130 130
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 230−240
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160 160
Valorant 356 356

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 280−290 280−290

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 450−500 450−500
Grand Theft Auto V 120 120
Metro Exodus 95 95
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 400−450 400−450

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 154 154
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85 80−85
Far Cry 5 131 131
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150 140−150

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 50−55 50−55
Counter-Strike 2 80−85 80−85
Grand Theft Auto V 134 134
Metro Exodus 56 56
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110 110
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 103 103
Counter-Strike 2 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 40−45
Dota 2 122 122
Far Cry 5 95 95
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 150−160
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how RTX 4000 and RX 6800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6800 XT is 77% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6800 XT is 73% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6800 XT is 84% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.48 60.01
Recency 13 November 2018 28 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 300 Watt

RTX 4000 has 47% lower power consumption.

RX 6800 XT, on the other hand, has a 69% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6800 XT 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.


3.6 542 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 4700 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6800 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or Radeon RX 6800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.