Quadro RTX 8200 vs Radeon Pro Vega 56
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 222 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 15.72 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 10.58 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Vega 10 | GA102 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 14 August 2017 (8 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 3584 | 7552 |
| Core clock speed | 1138 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1250 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 12,500 million | 40,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 260 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 280.0 | 708.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 8.96 TFLOPS | 22.66 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 96 |
| TMUs | 224 | 472 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | no 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 48 GB |
| Memory bus width | 2048 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 786 MHz | 14000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 672.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.1.125 | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 48 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 260 Watt |
Pro Vega 56 has 23.8% lower power consumption.
RTX 8200, on the other hand, has a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro Vega 56 and Quadro RTX 8200. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 56 is a mobile workstation graphics card while Quadro RTX 8200 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
