GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER vs Radeon Picasso

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated5
Place by popularitynot in top-10068
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data38.22
Power efficiencyno data19.35
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code namePicassoAD103
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)8 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$999

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 cores64010240
Core clock speed300 MHz2295 MHz
Boost clock speed1301 MHz2550 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million45,900 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt320 Watt
Texture fill rate52.04816.0
Floating-point processing power1.665 TFLOPS52.22 TFLOPS
ROPs8112
TMUs40320
Tensor Coresno data320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data310 mm
WidthIGP3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6X
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1438 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data736.3 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

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

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 320 Watt

Picasso has 3100% lower power consumption.

RTX 4080 SUPER, on the other hand, has a 180% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Picasso and GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER. 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.


AMD Radeon Picasso
Radeon Picasso
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER
GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER

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.


4.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon Picasso on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1788 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER 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.