FirePro W9000 vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 and FirePro W9000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX 4000
2018
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
35.30
+143%

RTX 4000 outperforms W9000 by a whopping 143% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking155390
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.890.40
Power efficiency17.094.11
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameTU104Tahiti
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date13 November 2018 (6 years ago)14 June 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 $3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

RTX 4000 has 3123% better value for money than FirePro W9000.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores23042048
Core clock speed1005 MHz975 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,600 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rate222.5124.8
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS3.994 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs144128
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no data
L1 Cache2.3 MB512 KB
L2 Cache4 MB768 KB

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mm279 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s264 GB/s

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 Connectors3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI
StereoOutput3D-+
Dual-link DVI support-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.85.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

RTX 4000 35.30
+143%
FirePro W9000 14.55

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 14937
+143%
Samples: 2066
FirePro W9000 6157
Samples: 15

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

RTX 4000 84931
+167%
FirePro W9000 31775

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.30 14.55
Recency 13 November 2018 14 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 350 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 142.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 118.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W9000 in performance tests.

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 RTX 4000
Quadro RTX 4000
AMD FirePro W9000
FirePro W9000

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 518 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 5 votes

Rate FirePro W9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or FirePro W9000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.