Radeon Pro V320 vs Quadro RTX 4000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking107not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation36.09no data
Power efficiency17.30no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameTU104Vega 10
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date13 November 2018 (6 years ago)29 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$899 no data

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 cores23043584
Core clock speed1005 MHz852 MHz
Boost clock speed1545 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt230 Watt
Texture fill rate222.5336.0
Floating-point processing power7.119 TFLOPS10.75 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs144224
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no data

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin2x 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 typeGDDR6HBM2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz945 MHz
Memory bandwidth416.0 GB/s483.8 GB/s

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 Connectors3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 November 2018 29 June 2017
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 230 Watt

RTX 4000 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 43.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro RTX 4000 and Radeon Pro V320. We've got no test results to judge.


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
Quadro RTX 4000
AMD Radeon Pro V320
Radeon Pro V320

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.


3.5 483 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon Pro V320 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.