Radeon Pro W6800 vs GRID M40

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M40 and Radeon Pro W6800, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GRID M40
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
3.81

Pro W6800 outperforms GRID M40 by a whopping 1068% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking68459
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data28.55
Power efficiency6.0514.13
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGM107Navi 21
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date18 May 2016 (8 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3843840
Core clock speed1033 MHz2075 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2320 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate33.06556.8
Floating-point processing power0.7933 TFLOPS17.82 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs32240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60

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
Lengthno data267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB32 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs6x mini-DisplayPort

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA5.0-

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 HD10−12
−1270%
137
+1270%
1440p9−10
−1189%
116
+1189%
4K7−8
−1100%
84
+1100%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data16.42
1440pno data19.39
4Kno data26.77

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Fortnite 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Dota 2 99
+0%
99
+0%
Far Cry 5 65
+0%
65
+0%
Fortnite 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 121
+0%
121
+0%
Metro Exodus 160
+0%
160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 199
+0%
199
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 157
+0%
157
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 88
+0%
88
+0%
Metro Exodus 171
+0%
171
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 64
+0%
64
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 125
+0%
125
+0%
Metro Exodus 55
+0%
55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+0%
99
+0%
Valorant 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 94
+0%
94
+0%
Far Cry 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

This is how GRID M40 and Pro W6800 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 1270% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 1189% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 1100% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.81 44.51
Recency 18 May 2016 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 250 Watt

GRID M40 has 400% lower power consumption.

Pro W6800, on the other hand, has a 1068.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M40 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GRID M40
GRID M40
AMD Radeon Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800

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.


3.1 8 votes

Rate GRID M40 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 83 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GRID M40 or Radeon Pro W6800, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.