Quadro RTX 6000 vs Radeon RX Vega 3

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 3 with Quadro RTX 6000, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 3
2019
15 Watt
2.74
RTX 6000
2018, $6,299
24 GB GDDR6, 260 Watt
42.33
+1445%

RTX 6000 outperforms RX Vega 3 by a whopping 1445% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking868104
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.01
Power efficiency14.2512.70
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code namePicassoTU102
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date20 November 2019 (6 years ago)13 August 2018 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,299

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 cores1924608
Core clock speed300 MHz1440 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1770 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate13.20509.8
Floating-point processing power0.4224 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs12288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72
L1 Cacheno data4.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data6 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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared24 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared384 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data672.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 ConnectorsMotherboard Dependent4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA-7.5
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.

RX Vega 3 2.74
RTX 6000 42.33
+1445%

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.

RX Vega 3 1149
Samples: 3101
RTX 6000 17744
+1444%
Samples: 304

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 HD12180−190
+1400%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data34.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 29 400−450
+1279%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 90−95
+1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 8 120−130
+1400%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7 100−105
+1329%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 7 100−105
+1329%
Counter-Strike 2 22 300−310
+1264%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 90−95
+1400%
Far Cry 5 5 75−80
+1400%
Fortnite 14 210−220
+1400%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 210−220
+1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 100−105
+1329%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14 200−210
+1438%
Valorant 45−50 700−750
+1422%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 9−10 130−140
+1344%
Counter-Strike 2 5 75−80
+1400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 23 350−400
+1422%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 90−95
+1400%
Dota 2 21 300−310
+1329%
Far Cry 5 7−8 100−105
+1329%
Fortnite 14−16 230−240
+1433%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 210−220
+1400%
Grand Theft Auto V 9 130−140
+1344%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 100−105
+1329%
Metro Exodus 2 30−33
+1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14 200−210
+1438%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6 90−95
+1400%
Valorant 45−50 700−750
+1422%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10 130−140
+1344%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 90−95
+1400%
Dota 2 19 290−300
+1426%
Far Cry 5 7−8 100−105
+1329%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 210−220
+1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 100−105
+1329%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14 200−210
+1438%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4 60−65
+1400%
Valorant 45−50 700−750
+1422%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14−16 230−240
+1433%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7 90−95
+1400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22 300−310
+1400%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 350−400
+1300%
Valorant 24−27 400−450
+1438%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 14−16
+1300%
Far Cry 5 4−5 60−65
+1400%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 90−95
+1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3 30−33
+1400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 60−65
+1400%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6 75−80
+1400%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 230−240
+1433%
Valorant 12−14 200−210
+1438%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9 120−130
+1400%
Far Cry 5 1−2 14−16
+1300%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 30−33
+1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4 45−50
+1400%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4 45−50
+1400%

This is how RX Vega 3 and RTX 6000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 is 1400% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.74 42.33
Recency 20 November 2019 13 August 2018
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 260 Watt

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 94% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000, on the other hand, has a 1445% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 3 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 3 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro RTX 6000 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.


3.4 2296 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 150 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 3 or Quadro RTX 6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.