Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro NVS 295 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 295 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 256MB VRAM Quadro NVS 295 and 48GB VRAM Quadro RTX 8000 Passive to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 295 's Advantages
Lower TDP (23W vs 260W)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 9 years and 3 months late
Boost Clock1620MHz
More VRAM (48GB vs 256GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 11.12GB/s)
4600 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro NVS 295
0.021 TFLOPS
Quadro RTX 8000 Passive +70995%
14.93 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

May 2009
Release Date
Aug 2018
Quadro NVS
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 1.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
Base Clock
1230 MHz
-
Boost Clock
1620 MHz
695 MHz
Memory Clock
1750 MHz

Memory

256MB
Memory Size
48GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR6
64bit
Memory Bus
384bit
11.12GB/s
Bandwidth
672.0GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
1
SM Count
72
8
Shading Units
4608
4
TMUs
288
4
ROPs
96
-
Tensor Cores
576
-
RT Cores
72
-
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
16 KB
L2 Cache
6 MB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

2.160 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
155.5 GPixel/s
2.160 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
466.6 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
29.86 TFLOPS
20.80 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
14.93 TFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
466.6 GFLOPS

Board Design

23W
TDP
260W
200 W
Suggested PSU
600 W
2x DisplayPort
Outputs
No outputs
None
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

Graphics Processor

G98
GPU Name
TU102
-
GPU Variant
TU102-875-A1
Tesla
Architecture
Turing
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
65 nm
Process Size
12 nm
0.21 billion
Transistors
18.6 billion
86 mm²
Die Size
754 mm²

Graphics Features

11.1 (10_0)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
1.1
CUDA
7.5
4.0
Shader Model
6.6

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy