GeForce GTX 295 vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with GeForce GTX 295, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
39.71
+1169%

RTX 4000 outperforms GTX 295 by a whopping 1169% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking110754
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation36.280.14
Power efficiency17.000.74
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameTU104GT200B
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date13 November 2018 (6 years ago)8 January 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 $500

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 4000 has 25814% better value for money than GTX 295.

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 cores2304480
CUDA cores per GPUno data240
Core clock speed1005 MHz576 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,600 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt289 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate222.546.08
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS0.5962 TFLOPS
ROPs6428
TMUs14480
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR6GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB1792 MB
Standard memory config per GPUno data896 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit896 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz999 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s223.8 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPUno data448 Bit

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 Connectors3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-CTwo Dual Link DVIHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)no data128bit

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.54.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA7.5+

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 39.71
+1169%
GTX 295 3.13

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 15300
+1169%
GTX 295 1206

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 39.71 3.13
Recency 13 November 2018 8 January 2009
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1792 MB
Chip lithography 12 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 289 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 1168.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 357.1% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 358.3% more advanced lithography process, and 80.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop one.


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 RTX 4000
Quadro RTX 4000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295

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.


3.5 483 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 84 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 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.