Radeon RX Vega 7 vs Quadro T1000
Aggregated performance score
Quadro T1000 outperforms Radeon RX Vega 7 by a whopping 129% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 297 | 500 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 10 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.58 | 10.90 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2021) | Vega (2017−2021) |
| GPU code name | TU117 | Vega Raven Ridge |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 27 May 2019 (4 years ago) | 7 January 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Current price | $920 | $387 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
RX Vega 7 has 27% better value for money than Quadro T1000.
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 | no data | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 1395 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1455 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,700 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 15 Watt |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Quadro T1000 and Radeon RX Vega 7 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.
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 clock speed | 8000 MHz | no data |
| 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 | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12_1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
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 | 50−55
+117%
| 23
−117%
|
| 1440p | 70−75
+119%
| 32
−119%
|
| 4K | 40−45
+122%
| 18
−122%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 17.01 | 7.42 |
| Recency | 27 May 2019 | 7 January 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 15 Watt |
The Quadro T1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 7 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro T1000 is a workstation card while Radeon RX Vega 7 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
