Radeon PRO W7900 vs Quadro P1000

Place in the ranking	415	11
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.80	17.72
Power efficiency	20.07	17.62
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GP107	Navi 31
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	7 February 2017 (7 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$375	$3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7900 has 206% better value for money than Quadro P1000.

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 cores	640	6144
Core clock speed	1493 MHz	1855 MHz
Boost clock speed	1519 MHz	2495 MHz
Number of transistors	3,300 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	295 Watt
Texture fill rate	48.61	958.1
Floating-point processing power	1.555 TFLOPS	61.32 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	192
TMUs	32	384
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	96

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	145 mm	280 mm
Width	MXM Module	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96.13 GB/s	864.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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 Connectors

Portable Device Dependent

3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.7	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
CUDA	6.1	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Quadro P1000 11.64

PRO W7900 75.39
+548%

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.

Quadro P1000 4474

PRO W7900 28976
+548%

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 HD	46 −530%	290−300 +530%
4K	11 −536%	70−75 +536%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	8.15 +69.2%	13.79 −69.2%
4K	34.09 +67.6%	57.13 −67.6%

Quadro P1000 has 69% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Quadro P1000 has 68% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −500%	120−130 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −532%	240−250 +532%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −500%	120−130 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −538%	300−310 +538%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 −533%	190−200 +533%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −525%	200−210 +525%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 −533%	190−200 +533%
Valorant	45−50 −530%	290−300 +530%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −532%	240−250 +532%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −500%	120−130 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Dota 2	40−45 −543%	270−280 +543%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −530%	290−300 +530%
Fortnite	41 −534%	260−270 +534%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −538%	300−310 +538%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 −533%	190−200 +533%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 −543%	270−280 +543%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −525%	200−210 +525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	103 −531%	650−700 +531%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 −533%	190−200 +533%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −529%	220−230 +529%
Valorant	45−50 −530%	290−300 +530%
World of Tanks	160−170 −517%	1000−1050 +517%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −532%	240−250 +532%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −500%	120−130 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Dota 2	40−45 −543%	270−280 +543%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −530%	290−300 +530%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −538%	300−310 +538%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 −533%	190−200 +533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	85−90 −525%	550−600 +525%
Valorant	45−50 −530%	290−300 +530%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −525%	100−105 +525%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −525%	100−105 +525%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −535%	400−450 +535%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −500%	60−65 +500%
World of Tanks	80−85 −502%	500−550 +502%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −509%	140−150 +509%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −545%	200−210 +545%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −515%	160−170 +515%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −530%	170−180 +530%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 −511%	110−120 +511%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −525%	150−160 +525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −533%	95−100 +533%
Valorant	27−30 −521%	180−190 +521%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Dota 2	21−24 −536%	140−150 +536%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 −536%	140−150 +536%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 −547%	220−230 +547%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −543%	45−50 +543%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −536%	140−150 +536%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −500%	60−65 +500%
Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −483%	35−40 +483%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −500%	18−20 +500%
Dota 2	21−24 −536%	140−150 +536%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −543%	90−95 +543%
Fortnite	12−14 −515%	80−85 +515%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −525%	100−105 +525%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 −525%	50−55 +525%
Valorant	12−14 −525%	75−80 +525%

This is how Quadro P1000 and PRO W7900 compete in popular games:

PRO W7900 is 530% faster in 1080p
PRO W7900 is 536% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.64	75.39
Recency	7 February 2017	13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	295 Watt

Quadro P1000 has 637.5% lower power consumption.

PRO W7900, on the other hand, has a 547.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P1000 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.