Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) vs Quadro GP100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
P102-100 P104-100 P106-090 P106-100 P400 P2000 P2200 P4000 P5000 Tesla P4 Tesla P40 Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
340 OEM 350 350 640SP 350 Fake Card 350 OEM 350X OEM 360 360 896SP 360E 370 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro GP100 with Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), including specs and performance data.

Quadro GP100
2016
16 GB HBM2, 235 Watt
32.84
+1193%

GP100 outperforms R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 1193% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro GP100 Quadro GP100
R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking177870
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.74no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameGP100Kaveri Spectre
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 October 2016 (9 years ago)14 January 2014 (12 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3584384
Core clock speed1304 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1442 MHzno data
Number of transistors15,300 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)235 Wattno data
Texture fill rate323.0no data
Floating-point processing power10.34 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs224no data
L1 Cache1.3 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MBno 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
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 typeHBM2no data
Maximum RAM amount16 GBno data
Memory bus width4096 Bitno data
Memory clock speed715 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth732.2 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA6.0-

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 HD180−190
+1186%
14
−1186%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+0%
9
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Quadro GP100 and R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) compete in popular games:

  • Quadro GP100 is 1186% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 32.84 2.54
Recency 1 October 2016 14 January 2014
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm

Quadro GP100 has a 1192.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro GP100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro GP100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop one.

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 Quadro GP100
Quadro GP100
AMD Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro GP100 Quadro GP100
vs
Pro Vega II Duo Radeon Pro Vega II Duo
R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
vs
ATI HD 4850 Radeon HD 4850
Quadro GP100 Quadro GP100
vs
Pro VII Radeon Pro VII
PRO WX 3100 AMD PRO WX 3100
vs
Arc A750 A750
P5000 Mobile Quadro P5000 Mobile
vs
ATI X1950 PRO X1950 PRO
P5000 Mobile Quadro P5000 Mobile
vs
ATI Xpress 1270 Mobile IGP 1270 Mobile IGP
P4000 Mobile Quadro P4000 Mobile
vs
GeForce 940MX 940MX
P3000 Mobile Quadro P3000 Mobile
vs
RTX 5050 5050
RX Vega 56 AMD RX Vega 56
vs
GTX 1070 Max-Q 1070 Max-Q
RX Vega 56 AMD RX Vega 56
vs
E9173 PCIe E9173 PCIe
P4000 Max-Q Quadro P4000 Max-Q
vs
P2000 Mobile P2000 Mobile
RX Vega 64 Liquid Limited Edition Vega 64 Liquid Limited Edition
vs
RX 6700 6700
RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling AMD RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
vs
Apple M1 GPU GPU

Community ratings

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

3.4 15 votes

Rate Quadro GP100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23 votes

Rate Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro GP100 or Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.