Radeon PRO W7800 vs TITAN RTX

Place in the ranking	66	16
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.11	29.90
Power efficiency	12.00	19.48
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	TU102	Navi 31
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	18 December 2018 (6 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,499	$2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7800 has 1317% better value for money than TITAN RTX.

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	4608	4480
Core clock speed	1350 MHz	1855 MHz
Boost clock speed	1770 MHz	2499 MHz
Number of transistors	18,600 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	280 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	509.8	699.7
Floating-point processing power	16.31 TFLOPS	44.78 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	128
TMUs	288	280
Tensor Cores	576	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	72	70

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 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	280 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	2x 8-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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	672.0 GB/s	576.0 GB/s

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, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

TITAN RTX 48.95

PRO W7800 73.82
+50.8%

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.

TITAN RTX 18858

PRO W7800 28439
+50.8%

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	161 −49.1%	240−250 +49.1%
1440p	101 −48.5%	150−160 +48.5%
4K	72 −38.9%	100−110 +38.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	15.52	10.41
1440p	24.74	16.66
4K	34.71	24.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

79
−39.2%

110−120

+39.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	104 −44.2%	150−160 +44.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	104 −44.2%	150−160 +44.2%
Battlefield 5	209 −43.5%	300−310 +43.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	143 −46.9%	210−220 +46.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 −39.2%	110−120 +39.2%
Far Cry 5	127 −49.6%	190−200 +49.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	201 −49.3%	300−310 +49.3%
Forza Horizon 4	281 −42.3%	400−450 +42.3%
Hitman 3	117 −45.3%	170−180 +45.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	348 −43.7%	500−550 +43.7%
Metro Exodus	144 −45.8%	210−220 +45.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	127 −49.6%	190−200 +49.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	206 −45.6%	300−310 +45.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	215 −39.5%	300−310 +39.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	186 −50.5%	280−290 +50.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	88 −47.7%	130−140 +47.7%
Battlefield 5	203 −47.8%	300−310 +47.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	131 −45%	190−200 +45%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 −39.2%	110−120 +39.2%
Far Cry 5	101 −48.5%	150−160 +48.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	154 −49.4%	230−240 +49.4%
Forza Horizon 4	254 −37.8%	350−400 +37.8%
Hitman 3	116 −46.6%	170−180 +46.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn	336 −48.8%	500−550 +48.8%
Metro Exodus	144 −45.8%	210−220 +45.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	110 −45.5%	160−170 +45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	286 −39.9%	400−450 +39.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 −48.5%	150−160 +48.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	204 −47.1%	300−310 +47.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	79 −39.2%	110−120 +39.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	80 −50%	120−130 +50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	102 −47.1%	150−160 +47.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 −41%	110−120 +41%
Far Cry 5	79 −39.2%	110−120 +39.2%
Forza Horizon 4	175 −48.6%	260−270 +48.6%
Hitman 3	111 −44.1%	160−170 +44.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	218 −37.6%	300−310 +37.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	242 −44.6%	350−400 +44.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	139 −43.9%	200−210 +43.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	86 −39.5%	120−130 +39.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

123

−46.3%

180−190
+46.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 −42.9%	140−150 +42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	75−80 −46.7%	110−120 +46.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 −48.1%	80−85 +48.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	66 −43.9%	95−100 +43.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	79 −39.2%	110−120 +39.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	66 −43.9%	95−100 +43.9%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −49.1%	85−90 +49.1%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 −37.3%	350−400 +37.3%
Hitman 3	100 −50%	150−160 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	168 −48.8%	250−260 +48.8%
Metro Exodus	114 −49.1%	170−180 +49.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	183 −47.5%	270−280 +47.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 −42.9%	110−120 +42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	205 −46.3%	300−310 +46.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

119

−42.9%

170−180
+42.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	88 −47.7%	130−140 +47.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	67 −49.3%	100−105 +49.3%
Hitman 3	48 −45.8%	70−75 +45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150 −46.7%	220−230 +46.7%
Metro Exodus	121 −48.8%	180−190 +48.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	103 −45.6%	150−160 +45.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	52 −44.2%	75−80 +44.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	43 −39.5%	60−65 +39.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50 −50%	75−80 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	33 −36.4%	45−50 +36.4%
Far Cry 5	49 −42.9%	70−75 +42.9%
Forza Horizon 4	114 −49.1%	170−180 +49.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	109 −46.8%	160−170 +46.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	43 −39.5%	60−65 +39.5%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

74
−48.6%

110−120

+48.6%

This is how TITAN RTX and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

PRO W7800 is 49% faster in 1080p
PRO W7800 is 49% faster in 1440p
PRO W7800 is 39% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	48.95	73.82
Recency	18 December 2018	13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	280 Watt	260 Watt

PRO W7800 has a 50.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 140% more advanced lithography process, and 7.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the TITAN RTX in performance tests.

Be aware that TITAN RTX is a desktop card while Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation one.

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