Radeon R9 270X vs Quadro RTX 4000

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 with Radeon R9 270X, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000
2018
8 GB GDDR6, 160 Watt
34.06
+212%

RTX 4000 outperforms R9 270X by a whopping 212% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking123409
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation37.545.05
Power efficiency16.894.80
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameTU104Curacao
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date13 November 2018 (6 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX 4000 has 643% better value for money than R9 270X.

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 cores23041280
Core clock speed1005 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1545 MHz1050 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt180 Watt
Texture fill rate222.584.00
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS2.688 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin2 x 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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s179.2 GB/s
Shared memory--

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
Eyefinity-+
HDMI-+
DisplayPort support-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
TressFX-+
TrueAudio-+
UVD-+
DDMA audiono data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
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 34.06
+212%
R9 270X 10.90

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 15222
+212%
R9 270X 4873

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 Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.06 10.90
Recency 13 November 2018 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 180 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 212.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 12.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 270X in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 270X 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 R9 270X
Radeon R9 270X

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.


3.5 498 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 763 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270X 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 R9 270X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.