Radeon Pro W6800 vs Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile with Radeon Pro W6800, including specs and performance data.

RTX 5000 Mobile
2019
16 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
36.04

Pro W6800 outperforms RTX 5000 Mobile by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13955
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data25.88
Power efficiency22.4714.12
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTU104Navi 21
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores30723840
Core clock speed1035 MHz2075 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHz2320 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate296.6556.8
Floating-point processing power9.492 TFLOPS17.82 TFLOPS
ROPs6496
TMUs192240
Tensor Cores384no data
Ray Tracing Cores4860

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s512.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs6x mini-DisplayPort
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
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 5000 Mobile 36.04
Pro W6800 51.47
+42.8%

  • Other tests
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Ice Storm GPU

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RTX 5000 Mobile 24620
Pro W6800 44404
+80.4%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RTX 5000 Mobile 54153
Pro W6800 82458
+52.3%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RTX 5000 Mobile 23035
Pro W6800 27937
+21.3%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RTX 5000 Mobile 117274
+27%
Pro W6800 92363

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

RTX 5000 Mobile 501167
+13.7%
Pro W6800 440592

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:

Full HD132
−3.8%
137
+3.8%
1440p84
−38.1%
116
+38.1%
4K54
−55.6%
84
+55.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data16.42
1440pno data19.39
4Kno data26.77

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 95−100
−49.5%
140−150
+49.5%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
−56.8%
110−120
+56.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
−51.3%
110−120
+51.3%
Atomic Heart 95−100
−49.5%
140−150
+49.5%
Battlefield 5 165
+11.5%
140−150
−11.5%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
−56.8%
110−120
+56.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
−51.3%
110−120
+51.3%
Far Cry 5 128
+82.9%
70
−82.9%
Fortnite 150−160
−36.7%
200−210
+36.7%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−40.8%
180−190
+40.8%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
−43.9%
140−150
+43.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−29.1%
170−180
+29.1%
Valorant 200−210
−28.8%
260−270
+28.8%
Atomic Heart 95−100
−49.5%
140−150
+49.5%
Battlefield 5 162
+9.5%
140−150
−9.5%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
−56.8%
110−120
+56.8%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
−0.4%
270−280
+0.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
−51.3%
110−120
+51.3%
Dota 2 98
−1%
99
+1%
Far Cry 5 123
+89.2%
65
−89.2%
Fortnite 150−160
−36.7%
200−210
+36.7%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−40.8%
180−190
+40.8%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
−43.9%
140−150
+43.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
−5.2%
121
+5.2%
Metro Exodus 99
−61.6%
160
+61.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−29.1%
170−180
+29.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 181
−9.9%
199
+9.9%
Valorant 200−210
−28.8%
260−270
+28.8%
Battlefield 5 152
+2.7%
140−150
−2.7%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
−56.8%
110−120
+56.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
−51.3%
110−120
+51.3%
Dota 2 92
+7%
86
−7%
Far Cry 5 115
+85.5%
62
−85.5%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−40.8%
180−190
+40.8%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
−32.7%
130−140
+32.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−29.1%
170−180
+29.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100
−57%
157
+57%
Valorant 181
−45.9%
260−270
+45.9%
Fortnite 150−160
−36.7%
200−210
+36.7%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−32.1%
35−40
+32.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
−43.7%
300−350
+43.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
−33.3%
88
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 59
−190%
171
+190%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 240−250
−22.5%
290−300
+22.5%
Battlefield 5 124
+6%
110−120
−6%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−62.2%
60−65
+62.2%
Far Cry 5 102
+59.4%
64
−59.4%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−56.5%
140−150
+56.5%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
−41.7%
85−90
+41.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
−59%
95−100
+59%
Fortnite 85−90
−52.3%
130−140
+52.3%
Atomic Heart 27−30
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−56.3%
24−27
+56.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
−81.2%
125
+81.2%
Metro Exodus 37
−48.6%
55
+48.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 71
−39.4%
99
+39.4%
Valorant 200−210
−39.4%
280−290
+39.4%
Battlefield 5 73
−6.8%
75−80
+6.8%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−56.3%
24−27
+56.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−64.7%
27−30
+64.7%
Dota 2 100−105
+6.4%
94
−6.4%
Far Cry 5 56
−7.1%
60
+7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−62.3%
95−100
+62.3%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−28.6%
45−50
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−82.9%
75−80
+82.9%
Fortnite 40−45
−65.9%
65−70
+65.9%

This is how RTX 5000 Mobile and Pro W6800 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 4% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 38% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 56% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 5000 Mobile is 89% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Pro W6800 is 190% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 5000 Mobile is ahead in 10 tests (16%)
  • Pro W6800 is ahead in 53 tests (83%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 36.04 51.47
Recency 27 May 2019 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 250 Watt

RTX 5000 Mobile has 127.3% lower power consumption.

Pro W6800, on the other hand, has a 42.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Pro W6800 is a workstation 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 5000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 5000
AMD Radeon Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800

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.


4.3
37 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile or Radeon Pro W6800, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.