Quadro4 900 XGL vs Quadro RTX A6000

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX A6000 and Quadro4 900 XGL, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX A6000
2020
48 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
55.54
+555300%

RTX A6000 outperforms Quadro4 900 XGL by a whopping 555300% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking501546
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.17no data
Power efficiency13.29no data
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code nameGA102NV25 A2
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date5 October 2020 (4 years ago)19 February 2002 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,649 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores10752no data
Core clock speed1410 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1800 MHzno data
Number of transistors28,300 million63 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)300 Wattno data
Texture fill rate604.82.400
Floating-point processing power38.71 TFLOPSno data
ROPs1128
TMUs3368
Tensor Cores336no data
Ray Tracing Cores84no 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 4.0 x16AGP 4x
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors8-pin EPSNone

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 typeGDDR6DDR
Maximum RAM amount48 GB128 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz325 MHz
Memory bandwidth768.0 GB/s10.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data
Resizable BAR+-

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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 1.4a2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)8.1
Shader Model6.7no data
OpenGL4.61.3
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA8.6-
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 A6000 55.54
+555300%
Quadro4 900 XGL 0.01

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 A6000 22741
+568425%
Quadro4 900 XGL 4

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 HD158-0−1
1440p123-0−1
4K106-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p29.42no data
1440p37.80no data
4K43.86no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 280−290 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 150−160 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 280−290 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Far Cry 5 52 0−1
Fortnite 240−250 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 210−220 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 160−170 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 300−310 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 150−160 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 280−290 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Dota 2 139 0−1
Far Cry 5 53 0−1
Fortnite 240−250 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 210−220 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 160−170 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 128 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140 0−1
Metro Exodus 98 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 307 0−1
Valorant 300−310 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 150−160 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 130−140 0−1
Dota 2 131 0−1
Far Cry 5 52 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 210−220 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 130−140 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180 0−1
Valorant 300−310 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 240−250 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 150−160 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 350−400 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 96 0−1
Metro Exodus 84 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 300−350 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75 0−1
Far Cry 5 52 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 170−180 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 65−70 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160 0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 70−75 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 155 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 70 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 146 0−1
Valorant 300−350 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 70−75 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 0−1
Dota 2 128 0−1
Far Cry 5 50 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 120−130 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 55.54 0.01
Recency 5 October 2020 19 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount 48 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 8 nm 150 nm

RTX A6000 has a 555300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 18 years, a 38300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1775% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX A6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro4 900 XGL in performance tests.

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 A6000
Quadro RTX A6000
NVIDIA Quadro4 900 XGL
Quadro4 900 XGL

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.


3.1 495 votes

Rate Quadro RTX A6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Quadro4 900 XGL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX A6000 or Quadro4 900 XGL, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.