NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 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 - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 39% higher core clock speed: 1395 MHz vs 1005 MHz
- Around 10% higher boost clock speed: 1695 MHz vs 1545 MHz
- 2.5x more texture fill rate: 556.0 GTexel/s vs 222.5 GTexel/s
- 4.6x more pipelines: 10496 vs 2304
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 8 nm vs 12 nm
- 3x more maximum memory size: 24 GB vs 8 GB
- 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 188222 vs 85714
- 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 732.196 vs 282.628
- 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 7585.258 vs 3403.106
- 2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 63.011 vs 24.719
- Around 81% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 247.569 vs 136.919
- 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 2441.384 vs 1010.818
- Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 33398 vs 20206
- Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 33398 vs 20206
- 2.5x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 19876 vs 7856
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 Sep 2020 vs 13 November 2018 |
Core clock speed | 1395 MHz vs 1005 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1695 MHz vs 1545 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 556.0 GTexel/s vs 222.5 GTexel/s |
Pipelines | 10496 vs 2304 |
Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm vs 12 nm |
Maximum memory size | 24 GB vs 8 GB |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 188222 vs 85714 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 732.196 vs 282.628 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 7585.258 vs 3403.106 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 63.011 vs 24.719 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 247.569 vs 136.919 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2441.384 vs 1010.818 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 33398 vs 20206 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 33398 vs 20206 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 19876 vs 7856 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000
- 2.2x lower typical power consumption: 160 Watt vs 350 Watt
- Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 1625 MHz (13000 MHz effective) vs 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective)
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 160 Watt vs 350 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 1625 MHz (13000 MHz effective) vs 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 vs 3354 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 vs 3354 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000
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) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 26836 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1050 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 188222 | 85714 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 732.196 | 282.628 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 7585.258 | 3403.106 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 63.011 | 24.719 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 247.569 | 136.919 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2441.384 | 1010.818 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 33398 | 20206 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 | 3359 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 33398 | 20206 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 | 3359 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 19876 | 7856 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
Code name | GA102 | TU104 |
Launch date | 1 Sep 2020 | 13 November 2018 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $1499 | $899 |
Place in performance rating | 42 | 194 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
GCN generation | Quadro RTX | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1695 MHz | 1545 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1395 MHz | 1005 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 556.0 GFLOPS (1:64) | 222.5 GFLOPS |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 35.58 TFLOPS (1:1) | 14.24 TFLOPS |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 35.58 TFLOPS | 7.119 TFLOPS |
Pipelines | 10496 | 2304 |
Pixel fill rate | 189.8 GPixel/s | 98.88 GPixel/s |
Texture fill rate | 556.0 GTexel/s | 222.5 GTexel/s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 350 Watt | 160 Watt |
Transistor count | 28300 million | 13600 million |
Render output units | 64 | |
Texture Units | 144 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Height | 138 mm (5.4 inches) | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 313 mm (12.3 inches) | 9.5 inches (241 mm) |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 750 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 12-pin | 1x 8-pin |
Width | Triple-slot | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 24 GB | 8 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 936.2 GB/s | 416.0 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 384 bit | 256 bit |
Memory clock speed | 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) | 1625 MHz (13000 MHz effective) |
Memory type | GDDR6X | GDDR6 |