UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) vs Quadro RTX 8000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro RTX 8000 with UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU), including specs and performance data.
RTX 8000 outperforms UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) by a whopping 2399% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 60 | 887 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.87 | no data |
Power efficiency | 13.29 | 13.82 |
Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Gen. 11 (2021) |
GPU code name | TU102 | Gen. 11 |
Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
Release date | 13 August 2018 (6 years ago) | 11 January 2021 (3 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $9,999 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 4608 | 32 |
Core clock speed | 1395 MHz | 350 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1770 MHz | 900 MHz |
Number of transistors | 18,600 million | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 10 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 260 Watt | 4.8 - 10 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 509.8 | no data |
Floating-point processing power | 16.31 TFLOPS | no data |
ROPs | 96 | no data |
TMUs | 288 | no data |
Tensor Cores | 576 | no data |
Ray Tracing Cores | 72 | no 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).
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
Length | 267 mm | no data |
Width | 2-slot | no data |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | no data |
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 | GDDR6 | no data |
Maximum RAM amount | 48 GB | no data |
Memory bus width | 384 Bit | no data |
Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | no data |
Memory bandwidth | 672.0 GB/s | no data |
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 Connectors | 4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Quick Sync | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_1) | 12_1 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | no data |
OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
CUDA | 7.5 | - |
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 | 190−200
+2275%
| 8
−2275%
|
Cost per frame, $
1080p | 52.63 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9
+0%
|
9
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 6
+0%
|
6
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 13
+0%
|
13
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3
+0%
|
3
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
This is how RTX 8000 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) compete in popular games:
- RTX 8000 is 2275% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 53 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 49.97 | 2.00 |
Recency | 13 August 2018 | 11 January 2021 |
Chip lithography | 12 nm | 10 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 260 Watt | 4 Watt |
RTX 8000 has a 2398.5% higher aggregate performance score.
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 6400% lower power consumption.
The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro RTX 8000 is a workstation card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.