Quadro RTX 6000 vs ATI Radeon HD 4850

Place in the ranking	814	67
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.26	5.66
Power efficiency	1.67	12.88
Architecture	TeraScale (2005−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	RV770	TU102
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	25 June 2008 (16 years ago)	13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	$6,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 6000 has 2077% better value for money than ATI HD 4850.

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 cores	800	4608
Core clock speed	625 MHz	1440 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	956 million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.00	509.8
Floating-point processing power	1 TFLOPS	16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	40	288
Tensor Cores	no data	576
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	72

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	246 mm	267 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1x 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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	24 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	993 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	63.55 GB/s	672.0 GB/s

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

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10.1 (10_1)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	4.1	6.5
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	-	7.5

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. 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.

ATI HD 4850 2.67

RTX 6000 48.55
+1718%

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.

ATI HD 4850 1026

RTX 6000 18660
+1719%

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:

900p	29 −1624%	500−550 +1624%
Full HD	39 −1695%	700−750 +1695%
1200p	19 −1479%	300−350 +1479%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

5.10

+76.4%

9.00
−76.4%

ATI HD 4850 has 76% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1650%	140−150 +1650%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1650%	140−150 +1650%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1669%	230−240 +1669%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −1650%	70−75 +1650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −1700%	180−190 +1700%
Valorant	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1650%	140−150 +1650%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Dota 2	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −1713%	290−300 +1713%
Fortnite	14−16 −1686%	250−260 +1686%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1669%	230−240 +1669%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Grand Theft Auto V	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −1650%	70−75 +1650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −1700%	450−500 +1700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −1700%	180−190 +1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1700%	180−190 +1700%
Valorant	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
World of Tanks	45−50 −1635%	850−900 +1635%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −1650%	140−150 +1650%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Dota 2	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Far Cry 5	16−18 −1713%	290−300 +1713%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1669%	230−240 +1669%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −1700%	450−500 +1700%
Valorant	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 −1479%	300−310 +1479%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
World of Tanks	18−20 −1567%	300−310 +1567%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −1674%	550−600 +1674%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1650%	70−75 +1650%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Valorant	9−10 −1678%	160−170 +1678%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −1713%	290−300 +1713%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −1700%	270−280 +1700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −1614%	120−130 +1614%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −1700%	270−280 +1700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Dota 2	16−18 −1713%	290−300 +1713%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%
Fortnite	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	1−2 −1700%	18−20 +1700%
Valorant	2−3 −1650%	35−40 +1650%

This is how ATI HD 4850 and RTX 6000 compete in popular games:

RTX 6000 is 1624% faster in 900p
RTX 6000 is 1695% faster in 1080p
RTX 6000 is 1479% faster in 1200p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.67	48.55
Recency	25 June 2008	13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	24 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	260 Watt

ATI HD 4850 has 136.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000, on the other hand, has a 1718.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 4850 is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 6000 is a workstation one.

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