Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) vs T1000 8 GB

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro T1000 T400 T400 4 GB T600 T1000 T1000 8 GB
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
2 5 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 9

Aggregate performance score

We've compared T1000 8 GB with Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000), including specs and performance data.

T1000 8 GB
2021
8 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
18.41
+121%

T1000 8 GB outperforms 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) by a whopping 121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking339563
Place by popularitynot in top-10036
Power efficiency28.5042.93
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameTU117Vega
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date6 May 2021 (5 years ago)7 January 2020 (6 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 cores896512
Core clock speed1065 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1395 MHz2100 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate78.12no data
Floating-point processing power2.5 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs56no data
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno data

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 x16no data
Length156 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/sno data
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 Connectors4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4ano data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.8no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-
CUDA7.5-

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 HD45−50
+105%
22
−105%
1440p35−40
+119%
16
−119%
4K21−24
+110%
10
−110%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 24
+0%
24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 63
+0%
63
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 19
+0%
19
+0%
Battlefield 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 43
+0%
43
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Fortnite 47
+0%
47
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 11
+0%
11
+0%
Battlefield 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 48
+0%
48
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Dota 2 51
+0%
51
+0%
Far Cry 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 31
+0%
31
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
+0%
18
+0%
Metro Exodus 16
+0%
16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+0%
21
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Dota 2 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 37
+0%
37
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 18
+0%
18
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21
+0%
21
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+0%
9
+0%
Metro Exodus 10
+0%
10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
+0%
22
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+0%
10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6
+0%
6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how T1000 8 GB and RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) compete in popular games:

  • T1000 8 GB is 105% faster in 1080p
  • T1000 8 GB is 119% faster in 1440p
  • T1000 8 GB is 110% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 18.41 8.32
Recency 6 May 2021 7 January 2020
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 15 Watt

T1000 8 GB has a 121% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000), on the other hand, has a 71% more advanced lithography process, and 233% lower power consumption.

The T1000 8 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.

Be aware that T1000 8 GB is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
T1000 T1000
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
vs
GTX 960A GeForce GTX 960A
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Pro WX 7100 Radeon Pro WX 7100
RTX 3080 Ti Mobile RTX 3080 Ti Mobile
vs
RTX 5070 Mobile 12 GB 5070 Mobile 12 GB
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Radeon 680M Radeon 680M
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Radeon 660M Radeon 660M
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
RTX 3050 8 GB GA107 RTX 3050 8 GB GA107
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Arc A770 Arc A770
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Arc Pro A40 Pro A40
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
RTX 3060 12 GB GA104 RTX 3060 12 GB GA104
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
RTX 5090 Mobile RTX 5090 Mobile
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Arc B570 Arc B570
T1000 8 GB T1000 8 GB
vs
Radeon 820M Radeon 820M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.3 56 votes

Rate T1000 8 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1785 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about T1000 8 GB or Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.