NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs AMD Radeon Instinct MI250X
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 48GB VRAM Quadro RTX 8000 Passive and 128GB VRAM Radeon Instinct MI250X to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive 's Advantages
Lower TDP (260W vs 500W)
AMD Radeon Instinct MI250X 's Advantages
Released 3 years and 3 months late
Boost Clock has increased by 5% (1700MHz vs 1620MHz)
More VRAM (128GB vs 48GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (3277GB/s vs 672.0GB/s)
9472 additional rendering cores
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro RTX 8000 Passive
14.93 TFLOPS
Radeon Instinct MI250X
+220%
47.87 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Aug 2018
Release Date
Nov 2021
Quadro
Generation
Radeon Instinct
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x16
Clock Speeds
1230 MHz
Base Clock
1000 MHz
1620 MHz
Boost Clock
1700 MHz
1750 MHz
Memory Clock
1600 MHz
Memory
48GB
Memory Size
128GB
GDDR6
Memory Type
HBM2e
384bit
Memory Bus
8192bit
672.0GB/s
Bandwidth
3277GB/s
Render Config
-
Compute Units
220
72
SM Count
-
4608
Shading Units
14080
288
TMUs
880
96
ROPs
0
576
Tensor Cores
-
72
RT Cores
-
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
16 KB (per CU)
6 MB
L2 Cache
16 MB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
155.5 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
0 MPixel/s
466.6 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
1496 GTexel/s
29.86 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
383.0 TFLOPS
14.93 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
47.87 TFLOPS
466.6 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
47.87 TFLOPS
Board Design
260W
TDP
500W
600 W
Suggested PSU
900 W
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
2x 8-pin
Graphics Processor
TU102
GPU Name
Aldebaran
TU102-875-A1
GPU Variant
Aldebaran XT
Turing
Architecture
CDNA 2.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
12 nm
Process Size
6 nm
18.6 billion
Transistors
58.2 billion
754 mm²
Die Size
Unknown
Graphics Features
12 Ultimate (12_2)
DirectX
N/A
4.6
OpenGL
N/A
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.3
Vulkan
N/A
7.5
CUDA
-
6.6
Shader Model
N/A
