Radeon RX 6950 XT vs Quadro NVS 280 PCI

Place in the ranking	1486	17
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	27.12
Power efficiency	0.11	15.19
Architecture	Rankine (2003−2005)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	NV34 B1	Navi 21
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	28 October 2003 (21 year ago)	10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$1,099

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 cores	no data	5120
Core clock speed	275 MHz	1925 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2324 MHz
Number of transistors	45 million	26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	150 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	13 Watt	335 Watt
Texture fill rate	1.100	743.7
Floating-point processing power	no data	23.8 TFLOPS
ROPs	2	128
TMUs	4	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	80

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).

Interface	PCI	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	168 mm	267 mm
Width	1-slot	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 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 type	DDR	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	64 MB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	250 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	8 GB/s	576.0 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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 Connectors	1x DMS-59	1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0a	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.5
OpenGL	1.5 (2.1)	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

NVS 280 PCI 0.02

RX 6950 XT 72.99
+364850%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

NVS 280 PCI 8

RX 6950 XT 28158
+351875%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	-0−1	222
1440p	-0−1	135
4K	-0−1	87

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	4.95
1440p	no data	8.14
4K	no data	12.63

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

161

+0%

161

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Battlefield 5	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	143 +0%	143 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Hitman 3	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	260−270 +0%	260−270 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	300−350 +0%	300−350 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Battlefield 5	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	128 +0%	128 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Hitman 3	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	260−270 +0%	260−270 +0%
Metro Exodus	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	442 +0%	442 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	122 +0%	122 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Hitman 3	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	318 +0%	318 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	396 +0%	396 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	216 +0%	216 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	107 +0%	107 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

120−130

+0%

120−130

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	93 +0%	93 +0%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Hitman 3	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	255 +0%	255 +0%
Metro Exodus	132 +0%	132 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	294 +0%	294 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

110−120

+0%

110−120

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Hitman 3	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	144 +0%	144 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +0%	46 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	172 +0%	172 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65 +0%	65 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

80−85

+0%

80−85

+0%

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.02	72.99
Recency	28 October 2003	10 May 2022
Maximum RAM amount	64 MB	16 GB
Chip lithography	150 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	13 Watt	335 Watt

NVS 280 PCI has 2476.9% lower power consumption.

RX 6950 XT, on the other hand, has a 364850% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 18 years, a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2042.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6950 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 280 PCI in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 280 PCI is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6950 XT is a desktop one.

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