Radeon Pro W6400 vs Quadro T500 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro T500 Mobile with Radeon Pro W6400, including specs and performance data.

T500 Mobile
2020
2 GB GDDR6, 18 Watt
9.00

Pro W6400 outperforms T500 Mobile by a whopping 133% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking483263
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency34.2928.77
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTU117Navi 24
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date2 December 2020 (4 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)

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 cores896768
Core clock speed1365 MHz2331 MHz
Boost clock speed1695 MHz2331 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate94.92111.9
Floating-point processing power3.037 TFLOPS3.58 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs5648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s112.0 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 outputs2x DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
Vulkan1.21.3
CUDA7.5-

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 HD36
−122%
80−85
+122%
1440p15
−100%
30−35
+100%
4K17
−106%
35−40
+106%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−131%
30−33
+131%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−122%
60−65
+122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Far Cry 5 30
−117%
65−70
+117%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−120%
55−60
+120%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%
Hitman 3 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−120%
110−120
+120%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−120%
55−60
+120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
−117%
65−70
+117%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−131%
30−33
+131%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−122%
60−65
+122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−122%
40−45
+122%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Far Cry 5 28
−132%
65−70
+132%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−120%
55−60
+120%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%
Hitman 3 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−120%
110−120
+120%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−132%
65−70
+132%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−120%
55−60
+120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
−117%
65−70
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
−132%
65−70
+132%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−131%
30−33
+131%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−122%
60−65
+122%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Far Cry 5 27
−122%
60−65
+122%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−120%
55−60
+120%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
−111%
40−45
+111%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Hitman 3 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−111%
40−45
+111%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−125%
27−30
+125%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−124%
85−90
+124%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−128%
130−140
+128%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Hitman 3 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−122%
80−85
+122%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−118%
24−27
+118%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%

This is how T500 Mobile and Pro W6400 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6400 is 122% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6400 is 100% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6400 is 106% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.00 20.97
Recency 2 December 2020 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 50 Watt

T500 Mobile has 177.8% lower power consumption.

Pro W6400, on the other hand, has a 133% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T500 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T500 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Radeon Pro W6400 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile
AMD Radeon Pro W6400
Radeon Pro W6400

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.1 104 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 28 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.