Riva TNT2 vs Radeon Pro W6800X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro W6800X with Riva TNT2, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6800X outperforms Riva TNT2 by a whopping 397300% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 121 | 1588 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 7.00 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 15.28 | no data |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) | Fahrenheit (1998−2000) |
| GPU code name | Navi 21 | NV5 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 3 August 2021 (4 years ago) | 12 October 1999 (26 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,799 | 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 | 3840 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 1800 MHz | 125 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2087 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 26,800 million | 15 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 250 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 200 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 500.9 | 0.25 |
| Floating-point processing power | 16.03 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 96 | 2 |
| TMUs | 240 | 2 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 | no data |
| L0 Cache | 960 KB | no data |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | no data |
| L3 Cache | 128 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 | Apple MPX | AGP 4x |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | Quad-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | Apple MPX | None |
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 | GDDR6 | SDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 16 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 150 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 512.0 GB/s | 2.4 GB/s |
| 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 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt | 1x VGA |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 6.0 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 1.2 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | N/A |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 39.74 | 0.01 |
| Recency | 3 August 2021 | 12 October 1999 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 250 nm |
Pro W6800X has a 397300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 21 years, a 204700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 3471.4% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro W6800X is our recommended choice as it beats the Riva TNT2 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro W6800X is a workstation graphics card while Riva TNT2 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
