Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) vs Quadro T1000 Max-Q

Place in the ranking	316	488
Place by popularity	not in top-100	28
Power efficiency	24.08	41.35
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code name	TU117	Vega
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	7 January 2020 (5 years 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 cores	896	512
Core clock speed	765 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1350 MHz	2100 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	75.60	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.419 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	56	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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	80 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

No outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12_1
Shader Model	6.6	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	3.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2	-
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	40−45 +73.9%	23 −73.9%
1440p	30−35 +76.5%	17 −76.5%
4K	16−18 +77.8%	9 −77.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +138%	13 −138%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +84.2%	19 −84.2%
Elden Ring	55−60 +206%	18 −206%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +93.1%	27−30 −93.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +244%	9 −244%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +133%	15 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +125%	32 −125%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +74.1%	27 −74.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +24.2%	33 −24.2%
Valorant	70−75 +59.1%	44 −59.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +93.1%	27−30 −93.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +244%	9 −244%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +218%	11 −218%
Dota 2	60−65 +114%	29 −114%
Elden Ring	55−60 +150%	22 −150%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +103%	30 −103%
Fortnite	95−100 +79.2%	50−55 −79.2%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +167%	27 −167%
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65 +226%	19 −226%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +147%	19 −147%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 +114%	57 −114%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +242%	12 −242%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +100%	27−30 −100%
Valorant	70−75 +400%	14 −400%
World of Tanks	210−220 +346%	48 −346%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +93.1%	27−30 −93.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +82.4%	16−18 −82.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +289%	9 −289%
Dota 2	60−65 +29.2%	48 −29.2%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +60.5%	35−40 −60.5%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +213%	23 −213%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 +71.8%	70−75 −71.8%
Valorant	70−75 +89.2%	37 −89.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	27−30 +200%	9 −200%
Elden Ring	27−30 +133%	12 −133%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 +200%	9 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +632%	22 −632%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
World of Tanks	120−130 +471%	21 −471%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +112%	16−18 −112%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +50%	10−11 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +550%	2 −550%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +137%	18−20 −137%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +175%	16 −175%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +129%	17 −129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +109%	10−12 −109%
Valorant	40−45 +12.8%	39 −12.8%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Dota 2	30−33 +200%	10 −200%
Elden Ring	12−14 +100%	6 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−33 +200%	10 −200%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +100%	6 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +300%	13 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +200%	10 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	30−33 +66.7%	18 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +100%	10−12 −100%
Fortnite	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +178%	9 −178%
Valorant	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%

This is how T1000 Max-Q and RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) compete in popular games:

T1000 Max-Q is 74% faster in 1080p
T1000 Max-Q is 76% faster in 1440p
T1000 Max-Q is 78% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the T1000 Max-Q is 632% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, T1000 Max-Q surpassed RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	17.49	9.01
Recency	27 May 2019	7 January 2020
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	15 Watt

T1000 Max-Q has a 94.1% higher aggregate performance score.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 months, a 71.4% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T1000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a mobile workstation one.

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