RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation vs Quadro T1000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro T1000 and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro T1000
2019
50 Watt
16.72

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation outperforms T1000 by a whopping 226% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking32046
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency23.2554.20
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTU117AD104
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)21 March 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 coresno data6144
Core clock speed1395 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1455 MHz1560 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data299.5
Floating-point processing powerno data19.17 TFLOPS
ROPsno data80
TMUsno data192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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 4.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data20 GB
Memory bus widthno data160 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data280.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12.0 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.9

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.

Quadro T1000 16.72
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 54.56
+226%

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.

Quadro T1000 6452
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 21055
+226%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro T1000 33874
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 122438
+261%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro T1000 30041
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 105594
+251%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.72 54.56
Recency 27 May 2019 21 March 2023
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 70 Watt

Quadro T1000 has 40% lower power consumption.

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 226.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T1000 in performance tests.


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 T1000
Quadro T1000
NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

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.


3.7 371 vote

Rate Quadro T1000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 49 votes

Rate RTX 4000 SFF 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.