Quadro K4000 vs Radeon RX 7600

Place in the ranking	85	550
Place by popularity	74	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	93.26	0.61
Power efficiency	18.07	6.11
Architecture	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Navi 33	GK106
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	24 May 2023 (1 year ago)	1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$269	$1,269

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 7600 has 15189% better value for money than Quadro K4000.

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	2048	768
Core clock speed	1720 MHz	810 MHz
Boost clock speed	2655 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	13,300 million	2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	339.8	51.84
Floating-point processing power	21.75 TFLOPS	1.244 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	24
TMUs	128	64
Ray Tracing Cores	32	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 4.0 x8	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	204 mm	241 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 6-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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	3 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	2250 MHz	1404 MHz
Memory bandwidth	288.0 GB/s	134.8 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 Connectors	1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1	1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.7	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	+
CUDA	-	3.0

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.

RX 7600 43.22
+510%

Quadro K4000 7.08

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.

RX 7600 16620
+510%

Quadro K4000 2723

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 HD	143 +581%	21−24 −581%
1440p	67 +570%	10−12 −570%
4K	37 +517%	6−7 −517%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	1.88 +3112%	60.43 −3112%
1440p	4.01 +3061%	126.90 −3061%
4K	7.27 +2809%	211.50 −2809%

RX 7600 has 3112% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 7600 has 3061% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RX 7600 has 2809% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	135 +543%	21−24 −543%
Cyberpunk 2077	148 +517%	24−27 −517%
Elden Ring	155 +546%	24−27 −546%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +581%	16−18 −581%
Counter-Strike 2	108 +575%	16−18 −575%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 +556%	9−10 −556%
Forza Horizon 4	284 +531%	45−50 −531%
Metro Exodus	161 +571%	24−27 −571%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +592%	12−14 −592%
Valorant	170−180 +548%	27−30 −548%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +581%	16−18 −581%
Counter-Strike 2	90 +543%	14−16 −543%
Cyberpunk 2077	50 +525%	8−9 −525%
Dota 2	150 +525%	24−27 −525%
Elden Ring	150−160 +542%	24−27 −542%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +531%	16−18 −531%
Fortnite	180−190 +578%	27−30 −578%
Forza Horizon 4	230 +557%	35−40 −557%
Grand Theft Auto V	150 +525%	24−27 −525%
Metro Exodus	119 +561%	18−20 −561%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +590%	30−33 −590%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +592%	12−14 −592%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +554%	24−27 −554%
Valorant	170−180 +548%	27−30 −548%
World of Tanks	270−280 +520%	45−50 −520%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	100−110 +581%	16−18 −581%
Counter-Strike 2	81 +575%	12−14 −575%
Cyberpunk 2077	45 +543%	7−8 −543%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +531%	16−18 −531%
Forza Horizon 4	199 +563%	30−33 −563%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +590%	30−33 −590%
Valorant	170−180 +548%	27−30 −548%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	77 +542%	12−14 −542%
Elden Ring	90−95 +550%	14−16 −550%
Grand Theft Auto V	77 +542%	12−14 −542%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +548%	27−30 −548%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
World of Tanks	270−280 +583%	40−45 −583%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +542%	12−14 −542%
Counter-Strike 2	51 +538%	8−9 −538%
Cyberpunk 2077	28 +600%	4−5 −600%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +562%	21−24 −562%
Forza Horizon 4	129 +514%	21−24 −514%
Metro Exodus	118 +556%	18−20 −556%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	86 +514%	14−16 −514%
Valorant	140−150 +576%	21−24 −576%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	22 +633%	3−4 −633%
Dota 2	82 +583%	12−14 −583%
Elden Ring	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
Grand Theft Auto V	82 +583%	12−14 −583%
Metro Exodus	38 +533%	6−7 −533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +576%	21−24 −576%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	82 +583%	12−14 −583%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +538%	8−9 −538%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +560%	10−11 −560%
Fortnite	60−65 +540%	10−11 −540%
Forza Horizon 4	69 +590%	10−11 −590%
Valorant	75−80 +533%	12−14 −533%

This is how RX 7600 and Quadro K4000 compete in popular games:

RX 7600 is 581% faster in 1080p
RX 7600 is 570% faster in 1440p
RX 7600 is 517% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	43.22	7.08
Recency	24 May 2023	1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	3 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	80 Watt

RX 7600 has a 510.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro K4000, on the other hand, has 106.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 7600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 7600 is a desktop card while Quadro K4000 is a workstation one.

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