Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs Radeon RX Vega 10

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 10 with Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 10
2019
10 Watt
3.65

RTX 3000 Max-Q outperforms RX Vega 10 by a whopping 402% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking701273
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency28.8924.18
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRavenTU106
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date8 January 2019 (6 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores6402304
Core clock speed300 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed1301 MHz1215 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate52.04175.0
Floating-point processing power1.665 TFLOPS5.599 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs40144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data448.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Readyno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-7.5
DLSS-+

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.

RX Vega 10 3.65
RTX 3000 Max-Q 18.33
+402%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Time Spy Graphics

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 Vega 10 1632
RTX 3000 Max-Q 8189
+402%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX Vega 10 3389
RTX 3000 Max-Q 17523
+417%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX Vega 10 2272
RTX 3000 Max-Q 13617
+499%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 10 14835
RTX 3000 Max-Q 66284
+347%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

RX Vega 10 737
RTX 3000 Max-Q 5048
+585%

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 HD17
−329%
73
+329%
1440p8−9
−463%
45
+463%
4K5−6
−480%
29
+480%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 40
−188%
110−120
+188%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
−258%
40−45
+258%
Hogwarts Legacy 14
−179%
35−40
+179%
Battlefield 5 19
−332%
80−85
+332%
Counter-Strike 2 33
−248%
110−120
+248%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−378%
40−45
+378%
Far Cry 5 12
−625%
87
+625%
Fortnite 33
−215%
100−110
+215%
Forza Horizon 4 17
−376%
80−85
+376%
Forza Horizon 5 13
−392%
60−65
+392%
Hogwarts Legacy 9
−333%
35−40
+333%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 15
−407%
75−80
+407%
Valorant 50−55
−172%
140−150
+172%
Battlefield 5 16
−413%
80−85
+413%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−1178%
110−120
+1178%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 42
−460%
230−240
+460%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−760%
40−45
+760%
Dota 2 32
−294%
126
+294%
Far Cry 5 11
−618%
79
+618%
Fortnite 15
−593%
100−110
+593%
Forza Horizon 4 14
−479%
80−85
+479%
Forza Horizon 5 11
−482%
60−65
+482%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
−750%
85
+750%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−388%
35−40
+388%
Metro Exodus 6
−617%
40−45
+617%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12
−533%
75−80
+533%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−708%
97
+708%
Valorant 50−55
−172%
140−150
+172%
Battlefield 5 17
−382%
80−85
+382%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−438%
40−45
+438%
Dota 2 29
−314%
120
+314%
Far Cry 5 10
−650%
75
+650%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−326%
80−85
+326%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−388%
35−40
+388%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−375%
75−80
+375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
−550%
52
+550%
Valorant 50−55
−90.7%
103
+90.7%
Fortnite 21−24
−352%
100−110
+352%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−33
−377%
140−150
+377%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
−1125%
49
+1125%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−455%
170−180
+455%
Valorant 40−45
−338%
180−190
+338%
Battlefield 5 0−1 55−60
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−533%
18−20
+533%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−389%
40−45
+389%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−467%
50−55
+467%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
−450%
21−24
+450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−417%
30−35
+417%
Fortnite 8−9
−475%
45−50
+475%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−306%
65
+306%
Valorant 20−22
−470%
110−120
+470%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Dota 2 12−14
−485%
76
+485%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−420%
26
+420%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Fortnite 4−5
−425%
21−24
+425%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 34
+0%
34
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how RX Vega 10 and RTX 3000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Max-Q is 329% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Max-Q is 463% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3000 Max-Q is 480% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3000 Max-Q is 1200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Max-Q is ahead in 58 tests (89%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (11%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.65 18.33
Recency 8 January 2019 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 60 Watt

RX Vega 10 has 500% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 402.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 10 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 10 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

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


AMD Radeon RX Vega 10
Radeon RX Vega 10
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


3.4
1083 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 10 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4
50 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 10 or Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.