ATI Radeon 8500 vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	155	1499
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	21.36	0.06
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code name	TU104	R200
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	14 August 2001 (23 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 cores	2560	no data
Core clock speed	1110 MHz	275 MHz
Boost clock speed	1560 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	13,600 million	60 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	249.6	2.200
Floating-point processing power	7.987 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	4
TMUs	160	8
Tensor Cores	320	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	40	no 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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	AGP 4x
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	64 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	275 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	8.8 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
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 compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	8.1
Shader Model	6.5	no data
OpenGL	4.6	1.4
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	7.5	-

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	109	-0−1
1440p	61	-0−1
4K	49	-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	65−70	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75	0−1
Elden Ring	110−120	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	94	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	65−70	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	160−170	0−1
Metro Exodus	103	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70	0−1
Valorant	130−140	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	65−70	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75	0−1
Dota 2	44	0−1
Elden Ring	110−120	0−1
Far Cry 5	89	0−1
Fortnite	150−160	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	160−170	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	110−120	0−1
Metro Exodus	51	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120	0−1
Valorant	130−140	0−1
World of Tanks	270−280	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	81	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	65−70	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75	0−1
Dota 2	127	0−1
Far Cry 5	90−95	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	160−170	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190	0−1
Valorant	130−140	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	60−65	0−1
Elden Ring	65−70	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35	0−1
World of Tanks	210−220	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	73	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30−35	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35	0−1
Far Cry 5	100−110	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	95−100	0−1
Metro Exodus	77	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60	0−1
Valorant	100−110	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35	0−1
Dota 2	60−65	0−1
Elden Ring	30−35	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65	0−1
Metro Exodus	27−30	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	39	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30−35	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Dota 2	106	0−1
Far Cry 5	45−50	0−1
Fortnite	45−50	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	55−60	0−1
Valorant	50−55	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	34.13	0.02
Recency	27 May 2019	14 August 2001
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	64 MB
Chip lithography	12 nm	150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	23 Watt

RTX 4000 Mobile has a 170550% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 12700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1150% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 8500, on the other hand, has 378.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 8500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 8500 is a desktop one.

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