RTX 5000 Ada Generation vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile with RTX 5000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000 Mobile
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
34.13

RTX 5000 Ada Generation outperforms RTX 4000 Mobile by a whopping 132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1558
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.3621.79
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTU104AD102
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)9 August 2023 (1 year ago)

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 cores256012800
Core clock speed1110 MHz1155 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz2550 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate249.61,020
Floating-point processing power7.987 TFLOPS65.28 TFLOPS
ROPs64176
TMUs160400
Tensor Cores320400
Ray Tracing Cores40100

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 16-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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s576.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort 1.4a
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.58.9

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 HD109
−129%
250−260
+129%
1440p61
−130%
140−150
+130%
4K49
−124%
110−120
+124%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
−122%
160−170
+122%
Elden Ring 110−120
−131%
270−280
+131%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 94
−123%
210−220
+123%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
−122%
160−170
+122%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−119%
350−400
+119%
Metro Exodus 103
−123%
230−240
+123%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
Valorant 130−140
−121%
300−310
+121%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 95−100
−129%
220−230
+129%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
−122%
160−170
+122%
Dota 2 44
−127%
100−105
+127%
Elden Ring 110−120
−131%
270−280
+131%
Far Cry 5 89
−125%
200−210
+125%
Fortnite 150−160
−124%
350−400
+124%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−119%
350−400
+119%
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
−127%
250−260
+127%
Metro Exodus 51
−116%
110−120
+116%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
−113%
400−450
+113%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
−131%
270−280
+131%
Valorant 130−140
−121%
300−310
+121%
World of Tanks 270−280
−116%
600−650
+116%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 81
−122%
180−190
+122%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−132%
160−170
+132%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
−122%
160−170
+122%
Dota 2 127
−128%
290−300
+128%
Far Cry 5 90−95
−131%
210−220
+131%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
−119%
350−400
+119%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 180−190
−113%
400−450
+113%
Valorant 130−140
−121%
300−310
+121%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 60−65
−130%
140−150
+130%
Elden Ring 65−70
−127%
150−160
+127%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
−126%
140−150
+126%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−129%
400−450
+129%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−127%
75−80
+127%
World of Tanks 210−220
−129%
500−550
+129%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 73
−119%
160−170
+119%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−119%
70−75
+119%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−119%
70−75
+119%
Far Cry 5 100−110
−131%
250−260
+131%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
−129%
220−230
+129%
Metro Exodus 77
−121%
170−180
+121%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−114%
120−130
+114%
Valorant 100−110
−128%
230−240
+128%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Dota 2 60−65
−119%
140−150
+119%
Elden Ring 30−35
−126%
70−75
+126%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
−119%
140−150
+119%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−114%
60−65
+114%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
−131%
250−260
+131%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−127%
50−55
+127%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
−119%
140−150
+119%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 39
−131%
90−95
+131%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−114%
30−33
+114%
Dota 2 106
−126%
240−250
+126%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−129%
110−120
+129%
Fortnite 45−50
−117%
100−105
+117%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−118%
120−130
+118%
Valorant 50−55
−131%
120−130
+131%

This is how RTX 4000 Mobile and RTX 5000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 129% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 130% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 5000 Ada Generation is 124% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.13 79.15
Recency 27 May 2019 9 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 250 Watt

RTX 4000 Mobile has 127.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 5000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 131.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 5000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while RTX 5000 Ada Generation 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 Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation
RTX 5000 Ada Generation

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 30 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 81 vote

Rate RTX 5000 Ada Generation 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.