Radeon PRO W7800 vs Quadro P4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P4000 and Radeon PRO W7800, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P4000
2017
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
30.12

PRO W7800 outperforms P4000 by a whopping 146% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking18514
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation17.2329.52
Power efficiency19.9419.82
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGP104Navi 31
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date6 February 2017 (7 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$815 $2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7800 has 71% better value for money than Quadro P4000.

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 cores17924480
Core clock speed1202 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHz2499 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate165.8699.7
Floating-point processing power5.304 TFLOPS44.78 TFLOPS
ROPs64128
TMUs112280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70

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
Length241 mm280 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin2x 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 width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1901 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 GB/s576.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
Display Port1.4no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA6.1-

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 P4000 30.12
PRO W7800 74.13
+146%

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 P4000 11622
PRO W7800 28601
+146%

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 HD71
−139%
170−180
+139%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.4814.70

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−135%
120−130
+135%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
−131%
150−160
+131%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
−131%
120−130
+131%
Battlefield 5 95−100
−145%
240−250
+145%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
−142%
150−160
+142%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−135%
120−130
+135%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−135%
160−170
+135%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
−134%
180−190
+134%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−142%
400−450
+142%
Hitman 3 60−65
−138%
150−160
+138%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
−126%
300−310
+126%
Metro Exodus 100−110
−145%
250−260
+145%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
−137%
180−190
+137%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
−138%
250−260
+138%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
−146%
280−290
+146%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
−131%
150−160
+131%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
−131%
120−130
+131%
Battlefield 5 95−100
−145%
240−250
+145%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
−142%
150−160
+142%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−135%
120−130
+135%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−135%
160−170
+135%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
−134%
180−190
+134%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−142%
400−450
+142%
Hitman 3 60−65
−138%
150−160
+138%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
−126%
300−310
+126%
Metro Exodus 100−110
−145%
250−260
+145%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
−137%
180−190
+137%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
−138%
250−260
+138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
−134%
150−160
+134%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
−146%
280−290
+146%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
−131%
150−160
+131%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
−131%
120−130
+131%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
−142%
150−160
+142%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−135%
120−130
+135%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−135%
160−170
+135%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−142%
400−450
+142%
Hitman 3 60−65
−138%
150−160
+138%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
−126%
300−310
+126%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
−138%
250−260
+138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
−144%
100−105
+144%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
−146%
280−290
+146%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
−137%
180−190
+137%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−146%
140−150
+146%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−139%
110−120
+139%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−134%
75−80
+134%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
−142%
75−80
+142%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−143%
85−90
+143%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−138%
50−55
+138%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−143%
85−90
+143%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
−130%
400−450
+130%
Hitman 3 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−138%
150−160
+138%
Metro Exodus 55−60
−146%
140−150
+146%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
−138%
95−100
+138%
Watch Dogs: Legion 160−170
−116%
350−400
+116%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
−135%
120−130
+135%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
−133%
70−75
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%
Hitman 3 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
−132%
350−400
+132%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−136%
85−90
+136%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−135%
80−85
+135%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−137%
45−50
+137%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−135%
40−45
+135%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−144%
100−105
+144%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−144%
95−100
+144%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−131%
60−65
+131%

This is how Quadro P4000 and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7800 is 139% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.12 74.13
Recency 6 February 2017 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 260 Watt

Quadro P4000 has 160% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 146.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 220% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P4000 in performance tests.


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

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 P4000
Quadro P4000
AMD Radeon PRO W7800
Radeon PRO W7800

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4 292 votes

Rate Quadro P4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 31 vote

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.