Radeon PRO W7700 vs Quadro T1000 Mobile

Place in performance ranking	302	40
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.26	26.01
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	RDNA 3.0 (2022)
GPU code name	N19P-Q1	Navi 32
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	13 November 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999
Current price	$1890	$999 (1x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7700 has 511% better value for money than T1000 Mobile.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	768	3072
Core clock speed	1395 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1455 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	69.84	499.2

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro T1000 Mobile and Radeon PRO W7700 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	8000 MHz	18 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	128.0 GB/s	576.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

T1000 Mobile 16.93

PRO W7700 54.50
+222%

Radeon PRO W7700 outperforms Quadro T1000 Mobile by 222% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

T1000 Mobile 6540

PRO W7700 21048
+222%

Radeon PRO W7700 outperforms Quadro T1000 Mobile by 222% in Passmark.

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 HD	64 −213%	200−210 +213%
4K	48 −213%	150−160 +213%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

8−9
−238%

27−30

+238%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −243%	48 +243%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −250%	27−30 +250%
Battlefield 5	16−18 −244%	55−60 +244%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −231%	53 +231%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −238%	27−30 +238%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −250%	49 +250%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −229%	45−50 +229%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −229%	75−80 +229%
Hitman 3	10−11 −230%	30−35 +230%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −272%	65−70 +272%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −246%	83 +246%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −272%	67 +272%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −238%	50−55 +238%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 −231%	50−55 +231%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −258%	43 +258%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −250%	27−30 +250%
Battlefield 5	16−18 −244%	55−60 +244%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 −236%	47 +236%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −238%	27−30 +238%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −242%	41 +242%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −229%	45−50 +229%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −226%	114 +226%
Hitman 3	10−11 −230%	30−35 +230%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −272%	65−70 +272%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −238%	54 +238%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −222%	58 +222%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −238%	50−55 +238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −250%	63 +250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 −231%	50−55 +231%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −222%	29 +222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 −250%	27−30 +250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −256%	32 +256%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −238%	27−30 +238%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −244%	31 +244%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −229%	75−80 +229%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −272%	65−70 +272%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −238%	50−55 +238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −250%	35 +250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 −231%	50−55 +231%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−257%

50
+257%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −230%	30−35 +230%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 −256%	30−35 +256%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −240%	16−18 +240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −275%	14−16 +275%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −250%	21−24 +250%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −250%	27−30 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −230%	30−35 +230%
Hitman 3	6−7 −233%	20−22 +233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −240%	30−35 +240%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −244%	30−35 +244%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −230%	30−35 +230%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −267%	10−12 +267%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
−250%

27−30

+250%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −240%	16−18 +240%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −225%	12−14 +225%
Hitman 3	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 −267%	10−12 +267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −240%	16−18 +240%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	3−4
Far Cry 5	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −229%	21−24 +229%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −260%	18−20 +260%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −250%	7−8 +250%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
−275%

14−16

+275%

This is how T1000 Mobile and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 213% faster in 1080p
PRO W7700 is 213% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.93	54.50
Recency	27 May 2019	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	190 Watt