Quadro4 200 NVS vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking656not rated
Place by popularity30not in top-100
Power efficiency20.74no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeNV17 A3
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)22 December 2003 (20 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 cores512no data
Core clock speedno data250 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data29 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt11 Watt
Texture fill rateno data1.000
ROPsno data2
TMUsno data4

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).

Interfaceno dataAGP 4x
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data64 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 data1x LFH60

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_18.0
OpenGLno data1.3
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 October 2017 22 December 2003
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 11 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has an age advantage of 13 years, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro4 200 NVS, on the other hand, has 36.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and Quadro4 200 NVS. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while Quadro4 200 NVS is a workstation one.


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

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 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
NVIDIA Quadro4 200 NVS
Quadro4 200 NVS

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.5 1377 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate Quadro4 200 NVS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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