Radeon HD 6970 vs Quadro RTX 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with Radeon HD 6970, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018, $899
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
35.52
+427%

RTX 4000 outperforms HD 6970 by a whopping 427% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking154596
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.850.93
Power efficiency17.122.08
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameTU104Cayman
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date13 November 2018 (7 years ago)14 December 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 $369

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX 4000 has 1282% better value for money than HD 6970.

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 cores23041536
Core clock speed1005 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1545 MHz880 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million2,640 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt550 Watt
Texture fill rate222.584.48
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS2.703 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs14496
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no data
L1 Cache2.3 MB192 KB
L2 Cache4 MB512 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 2.0 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm286 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/sno data

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-C2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2
Eyefinity-+
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)DirectX® 11
Shader Model6.85.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.3-
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 35.52
+427%
HD 6970 6.74

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 14924
+427%
Samples: 2122
HD 6970 2831
Samples: 2215

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.52 6.74
Recency 13 November 2018 14 December 2010
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 550 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 427% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 243.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6970 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6970 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 6970
Radeon HD 6970

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.


3.6 522 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 166 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6970 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 Radeon HD 6970, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.