AMD Radeon Pro W6800 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro W6800 and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro W6800
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 28% higher core clock speed: 2075 MHz vs 1620 MHz
- Around 38% higher boost clock speed: 2507 MHz vs 1815 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 12 nm
- Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 934 vs 749
- Around 24% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 19919 vs 16042
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 20988 vs 19811
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 20988 vs 19811
- Around 25% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 131707 vs 105171
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 8 Jun 2021 vs 13 August 2018 |
Core clock speed | 2075 MHz vs 1620 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 2507 MHz vs 1815 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 12 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 934 vs 749 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19919 vs 16042 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 20988 vs 19811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 20988 vs 19811 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 131707 vs 105171 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
- 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 200 Watt vs 450 Watt
- 7x more memory clock speed: 14000 MHz vs 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 200 Watt vs 450 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz vs 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 vs 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 vs 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3357 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro W6800
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon Pro W6800 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 934 | 749 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19919 | 16042 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 20988 | 19811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 20988 | 19811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3719 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3719 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3358 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 131707 | 105171 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 226.447 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4161.764 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 25.476 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 118.544 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1106.12 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 10685 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon Pro W6800 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Turing |
Code name | Navi 21 | TU104 |
Launch date | 8 Jun 2021 | 13 August 2018 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $2249 | $2,299 |
Place in performance rating | 108 | 154 |
Type | Workstation | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 2507 MHz | 1815 MHz |
Compute units | 60 | |
Core clock speed | 2075 MHz | 1620 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 1203 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 38.51 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 19.25 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 3840 | |
Pixel fill rate | 240.7 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 601.7 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 450 Watt | 200 Watt |
Transistor count | 26800 million | 13,600 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 6x mini-DisplayPort | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Form factor | Dual-slot | |
Height | 50 mm (2 inches) | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 267 mm |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 850 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Width | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 512 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | |
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 14000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR6 |