NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 16GB VRAM RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation and 24GB VRAM Quadro RTX 6000 Passive to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 's Advantages
Boost Clock has increased by 12% (1746MHz vs 1560MHz)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (1.02TB/s vs 672.0GB/s)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive 's Advantages
More VRAM (24GB vs 16GB)
768 additional rendering cores
Lower TDP (260W vs 300W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
13.41 TFLOPS
Quadro RTX 6000 Passive
+7%
14.38 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Nov 2018
Release Date
Aug 2018
Radeon Instinct
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 4.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16
Clock Speeds
1200 MHz
Base Clock
1305 MHz
1746 MHz
Boost Clock
1560 MHz
1000 MHz
Memory Clock
1750 MHz
Memory
16GB
Memory Size
24GB
HBM2
Memory Type
GDDR6
4096bit
Memory Bus
384bit
1.02TB/s
Bandwidth
672.0GB/s
Render Config
60
Compute Units
-
48
SM Count
72
3840
Shading Units
4608
240
TMUs
288
64
ROPs
96
192
Tensor Cores
576
48
RT Cores
72
16 KB (per CU)
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
4 MB
L2 Cache
6 MB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
111.7 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
149.8 GPixel/s
419.0 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
449.3 GTexel/s
26.82 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
28.75 TFLOPS
13.41 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
14.38 TFLOPS
6.705 TFLOPS
FP64 (double)
449.3 GFLOPS
Board Design
300W
TDP
260W
700 W
Suggested PSU
600 W
1x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
Outputs
No outputs
2x 8-pin
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Graphics Processor
Vega 20
GPU Name
TU102
Vega 20 GLXT
GPU Variant
TU102-875-A1
GCN 5.1
Architecture
Turing
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
7 nm
Process Size
12 nm
13.23 billion
Transistors
18.6 billion
331 mm²
Die Size
754 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (12_1)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
2.1
OpenCL
3.0
1.3
Vulkan
1.3
8.9
CUDA
7.5
6.7
Shader Model
6.6
