Quadro T1000 vs Radeon Pro Vega 16

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 16 with Quadro T1000, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 16
2018
4 GB HBM2, 75 Watt
12.47

T1000 outperforms Pro Vega 16 by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking396322
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.5923.35
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameVega 12TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date14 November 2018 (6 years ago)27 May 2019 (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 cores1024no data
Core clock speed815 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed1190 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate76.16no data
Floating-point processing power2.437 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs64no 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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeHBM2no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width1024 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1200 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth307.2 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12.0 (12_1)
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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.

Pro Vega 16 12.47
Quadro T1000 16.75
+34.3%

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.

Pro Vega 16 4809
Quadro T1000 6463
+34.4%

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.

Pro Vega 16 22421
Quadro T1000 33865
+51%

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 HD56
−33.9%
75−80
+33.9%
4K38
−31.6%
50−55
+31.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−34.1%
110−120
+34.1%
Hitman 3 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−28.8%
85−90
+28.8%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−34.1%
55−60
+34.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−33.8%
95−100
+33.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−34.1%
110−120
+34.1%
Hitman 3 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−28.8%
85−90
+28.8%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−34.1%
55−60
+34.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−29%
40−45
+29%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−33.8%
95−100
+33.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−34.1%
110−120
+34.1%
Hitman 3 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−28.8%
85−90
+28.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−25%
50−55
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−33.8%
95−100
+33.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−31.1%
80−85
+31.1%
Hitman 3 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Metro Exodus 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−28.2%
100−105
+28.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Hitman 3 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−27.1%
75−80
+27.1%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%

This is how Pro Vega 16 and Quadro T1000 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro T1000 is 34% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro T1000 is 32% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.47 16.75
Recency 14 November 2018 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro T1000 has a 34.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 months, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 16 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 16 is a mobile workstation card while Quadro T1000 is a workstation one.


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 Pro Vega 16
Radeon Pro Vega 16
NVIDIA Quadro T1000
Quadro T1000

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.


3.8 10 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 16 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 388 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 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.