NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 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 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
- Around 1% higher boost clock speed: 1545 MHz vs 1530 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 110 Watt vs 230 Watt
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 14832 vs 13932
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 19565 vs 13044
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 19565 vs 13044
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 13 August 2018 |
Boost clock speed | 1545 MHz vs 1530 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt vs 230 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14832 vs 13932 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19565 vs 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19565 vs 13044 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
- Around 16% higher core clock speed: 1200 MHz vs 1035 MHz
- Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 815 vs 705
- 9.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 30936 vs 3346
- 9.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 30936 vs 3346
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7164 vs 3714
- Around 93% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7164 vs 3714
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1200 MHz vs 1035 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 815 vs 705 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 30936 vs 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 30936 vs 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7164 vs 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7164 vs 3714 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 705 | 815 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14832 | 13932 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19565 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19565 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 30936 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 30936 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 7164 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 69812 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 171.616 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4031.404 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.925 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 247.788 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1195.863 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
Code name | TU104 | Vega 10 |
Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 13 August 2018 |
Place in performance rating | 175 | 118 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $999 | |
Price now | $999 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 13.37 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1545 MHz | 1530 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1035 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 296.6 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 18.98 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.492 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 3072 | |
Pixel fill rate | 98.88 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 296.6 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt | 230 Watt |
Transistor count | 13600 million | 12,500 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Width | IGP | |
Length | 267 mm | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 448 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | |
Memory type | GDDR6 | |
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz |