Radeon RX 7800 XT vs Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q

Place in the ranking	171	33
Place by popularity	not in top-100	66
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	67.96
Power efficiency	28.20	16.53
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	TU104	Navi 32
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	25 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$499

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 cores	2560	3840
Core clock speed	780 MHz	1295 MHz
Boost clock speed	1380 MHz	2430 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	263 Watt
Texture fill rate	220.8	583.2
Floating-point processing power	7.066 TFLOPS	37.32 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	96
TMUs	160	240
Tensor Cores	320	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	40	60

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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	2438 MHz
Memory bandwidth	416.0 GB/s	624.1 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	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	-	+
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 31.57

RX 7800 XT 60.83
+92.7%

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.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 12569

RX 7800 XT 24219
+92.7%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 23574

RX 7800 XT 65611
+178%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 17049

RX 7800 XT 49707
+192%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RTX 4000 Max-Q 35167

RX 7800 XT 202773
+477%

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	88 −144%	215 +144%
1440p	46 −165%	122 +165%
4K	56 −28.6%	72 +28.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.32
1440p	no data	4.09
4K	no data	6.93

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −277%	241 +277%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −279%	258 +279%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −25.8%	110−120 +25.8%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −213%	200 +213%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −41.2%	96 +41.2%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −221%	488 +221%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90 −88.2%	160−170 +88.2%
Metro Exodus	80−85 −109%	171 +109%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −70.1%	110−120 +70.1%
Valorant	130−140 −126%	290−300 +126%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −25.8%	110−120 +25.8%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −155%	163 +155%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −17.6%	80 +17.6%
Dota 2	36 −394%	178 +394%
Far Cry 5	66 −71.2%	113 +71.2%
Fortnite	150−160 −62.9%	240−250 +62.9%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −162%	398 +162%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90 −88.2%	160−170 +88.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	100−110 −66.4%	178 +66.4%
Metro Exodus	80−85 −79.3%	147 +79.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −16.8%	210−220 +16.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −70.1%	110−120 +70.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 −55.4%	170−180 +55.4%
Valorant	130−140 −126%	290−300 +126%
World of Tanks	270−280 −0.7%	270−280 +0.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −25.8%	110−120 +25.8%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −133%	149 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −8.8%	74 +8.8%
Dota 2	101 −88.1%	190−200 +88.1%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −38.2%	120−130 +38.2%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 −124%	340 +124%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90 −88.2%	160−170 +88.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −16.8%	210−220 +16.8%
Valorant	130−140 −126%	290−300 +126%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −78.6%	50−55 +78.6%
Dota 2	55−60 −141%	140 +141%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −137%	140 +137%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −145%	75−80 +145%
World of Tanks	210−220 −102%	400−450 +102%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −38.1%	85−90 +38.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −54.8%	48 +54.8%
Far Cry 5	100−110 −55.3%	160−170 +55.3%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 −167%	243 +167%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 −119%	110−120 +119%
Metro Exodus	70−75 −103%	148 +103%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −177%	147 +177%
Valorant	95−100 −166%	250−260 +166%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −157%	35−40 +157%
Dota 2	60−65 −149%	152 +149%
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65 −149%	152 +149%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −133%	63 +133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −103%	200−210 +103%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 −149%	152 +149%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −125%	80−85 +125%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −50%	21 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −69.2%	22 +69.2%
Dota 2	65 −84.6%	120−130 +84.6%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −128%	100−110 +128%
Fortnite	40−45 −118%	95−100 +118%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −150%	130 +150%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 −145%	70−75 +145%
Valorant	45−50 −196%	140−150 +196%

This is how RTX 4000 Max-Q and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7800 XT is 144% faster in 1080p
RX 7800 XT is 165% faster in 1440p
RX 7800 XT is 29% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7800 XT is 394% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 7800 XT is ahead in 61 test (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	31.57	60.83
Recency	27 May 2019	25 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	263 Watt

RTX 4000 Max-Q has 228.8% lower power consumption.

RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 92.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 7800 XT is a desktop one.

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