NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

Pro Vega 64
33.50
+1209%

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms Quadro FX 4800 by 1209% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking147784
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money1.970.09
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameVega 10GT200B
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date27 June 2017 (6 years old)11 November 2008 (15 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,799
Current price$6074 $632 (0.4x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro Vega 64 has 2089% better value for money than FX 4800.

Technical specs

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 cores4096192
Core clock speed1250 MHz602 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHzno data
Number of transistors12,500 million1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate345.638.53
Floating-point performance11,059 gflops462.3 gflops

Size and 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin

Memory

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 typeHBM2GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount16 GB1536 MB
Memory bus width2048 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1572 MHz1600 MHz
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s76.8 GB/s

Video outputs and ports

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 outputs1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.1.125N/A
CUDAno data1.3

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.

Pro Vega 64 33.50
+1209%
FX 4800 2.56

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms Quadro FX 4800 by 1209% in our combined 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%

Pro Vega 64 12984
+1210%
FX 4800 991

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms Quadro FX 4800 by 1210% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 33.50 2.56
Recency 27 June 2017 11 November 2008
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 1536 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 150 Watt

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4800 in performance tests.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800
Quadro FX 4800

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 18 votes

Rate AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 58 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro FX 4800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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