Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 48GB VRAM Quadro RTX 8000 Passive and 2GB VRAM Quadro 4000 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 7 years and 9 months late
Boost Clock1620MHz
More VRAM (48GB vs 2GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 89.86GB/s)
4352 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro 4000 's Advantages
Lower TDP (142W vs 260W)

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro RTX 8000 Passive +2972%
14.93 TFLOPS
Quadro 4000
0.486 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Aug 2018
Release Date
Nov 2010
Quadro
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16

Clock Speeds

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

Memory

48GB
Memory Size
2GB
GDDR6
Memory Type
GDDR5
384bit
Memory Bus
256bit
672.0GB/s
Bandwidth
89.86GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
72
SM Count
8
4608
Shading Units
256
288
TMUs
32
96
ROPs
32
576
Tensor Cores
-
72
RT Cores
-
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
6 MB
L2 Cache
512 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

155.5 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
7.600 GPixel/s
466.6 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
15.20 GTexel/s
29.86 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
14.93 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
486.4 GFLOPS
466.6 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
243.2 GFLOPS

Board Design

260W
TDP
142W
600 W
Suggested PSU
300 W
No outputs
Outputs
1x DVI 2x DisplayPort
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin

Graphics Processor

TU102
GPU Name
GF100
TU102-875-A1
GPU Variant
GF100-825-A3
Turing
Architecture
Fermi
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
12 nm
Process Size
40 nm
18.6 billion
Transistors
3.1 billion
754 mm²
Die Size
529 mm²

Graphics Features

12 Ultimate (12_2)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.3
Vulkan
N/A
7.5
CUDA
2.0
6.6
Shader Model
5.1

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy