Radeon HD 6790 vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with Radeon HD 6790, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
39.35
+857%

RTX 4000 outperforms HD 6790 by a whopping 857% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking113698
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation37.720.83
Power efficiency16.971.89
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameTU104Barts
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date13 November 2018 (6 years ago)4 April 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RTX 4000 has 4445% better value for money than HD 6790.

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 cores2304800
Core clock speed1005 MHz840 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,600 million1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate222.533.60
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS1.344 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs14440
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 mm198 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin2x 6-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 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s134.4 GB/s

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-C2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

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.

RTX 4000 39.35
+857%
HD 6790 4.11

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 15216
+858%
HD 6790 1588

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:

900p450−500
+765%
52
−765%
Full HD550−600
+802%
61
−802%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.63
+49.4%
2.44
−49.4%
  • RTX 4000 has 49% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how RTX 4000 and HD 6790 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 is 765% faster in 900p
  • RTX 4000 is 802% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.35 4.11
Recency 13 November 2018 4 April 2011
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 150 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 857.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6790, on the other hand, has 6.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6790 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6790 is a desktop one.

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 Radeon HD 6790
Radeon HD 6790

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.


3.5 495 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 154 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6790 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 or Radeon HD 6790, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.