Radeon Pro W6800 vs GeForce GTX 480 512

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated52
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data23.18
Power efficiencyno data14.30
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGF100Navi 21
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores5123840
Core clock speed527 MHz2075 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2320 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)375 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate33.73556.8
Floating-point processing powerno data17.82 TFLOPS
ROPs4896
TMUs64240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length292 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB32 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2.8 GB/s2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth134.4 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a6x mini-DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA2.0-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 32 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 375 Watt 250 Watt

Pro W6800 has a 2033.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 480 Core 512 and Radeon Pro W6800. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 480 Core 512 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro W6800 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 Core 512
GeForce GTX 480 Core 512
AMD Radeon Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 480 Core 512 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 81 vote

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.