Quadro 4000 vs Radeon R9 390X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390X with Quadro 4000, including specs and performance data.

R9 390X
2015
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
24.44
+538%

R9 390X outperforms Quadro 4000 by a whopping 538% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking206668
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.620.52
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGrenada XTGF100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date16 June 2015 (9 years ago)2 November 2010 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 $1,199
Current price$19.99 (0x MSRP)$295 (0.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 390X has 2327% better value for money than Quadro 4000.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2816256
Core clock speedno data475 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,200 million3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt142 Watt
Texture fill rate184.815.20
Floating-point performance5,914 gflops486.4 gflops

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm241 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire1no 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MB2 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz2808 MHz
Memory bandwidth384 GB/s89.86 GB/s
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+no data
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support+no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D-no data
PowerTune+no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore-no data
VCE+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+no data
CUDAno data2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

R9 390X 24.44
+538%
Quadro 4000 3.83

Radeon R9 390X outperforms Quadro 4000 by 538% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 390X 9439
+538%
Quadro 4000 1479

Radeon R9 390X outperforms Quadro 4000 by 538% in Passmark.

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 HD86
+617%
12−14
−617%
4K47
+571%
7−8
−571%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 250−260
+525%
40−45
−525%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 290−300
+517%
45−50
−517%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 260−270
+519%
40−45
−519%
Battlefield 5 500−550
+525%
80−85
−525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+500%
50−55
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 250−260
+525%
40−45
−525%
Far Cry 5 350−400
+525%
55−60
−525%
Far Cry New Dawn 400−450
+525%
60−65
−525%
Forza Horizon 4 650−700
+513%
100−110
−513%
Hitman 3 300−310
+512%
45−50
−512%
Horizon Zero Dawn 600−650
+519%
95−100
−519%
Metro Exodus 500−550
+525%
80−85
−525%
Red Dead Redemption 2 400−450
+515%
65−70
−515%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 500−550
+502%
80−85
−502%
Watch Dogs: Legion 400−450
+471%
70−75
−471%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 290−300
+517%
45−50
−517%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 260−270
+519%
40−45
−519%
Battlefield 5 500−550
+525%
80−85
−525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+500%
50−55
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 250−260
+525%
40−45
−525%
Far Cry 5 350−400
+525%
55−60
−525%
Far Cry New Dawn 400−450
+525%
60−65
−525%
Forza Horizon 4 650−700
+513%
100−110
−513%
Hitman 3 300−310
+512%
45−50
−512%
Horizon Zero Dawn 600−650
+519%
95−100
−519%
Metro Exodus 500−550
+525%
80−85
−525%
Red Dead Redemption 2 400−450
+515%
65−70
−515%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 500−550
+502%
80−85
−502%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 450−500
+492%
76
−492%
Watch Dogs: Legion 400−450
+471%
70−75
−471%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 290−300
+517%
45−50
−517%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 260−270
+519%
40−45
−519%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+500%
50−55
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 250−260
+525%
40−45
−525%
Far Cry 5 350−400
+525%
55−60
−525%
Forza Horizon 4 650−700
+513%
100−110
−513%
Horizon Zero Dawn 600−650
+519%
95−100
−519%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 500−550
+502%
80−85
−502%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 260−270
+534%
41
−534%
Watch Dogs: Legion 400−450
+471%
70−75
−471%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 400−450
+515%
65−70
−515%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 290−300
+530%
45−50
−530%
Far Cry New Dawn 300−310
+477%
50−55
−477%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 150−160
+500%
24−27
−500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 150−160
+525%
24−27
−525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 210−220
+536%
30−35
−536%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+533%
14−16
−533%
Far Cry 5 260−270
+519%
40−45
−519%
Forza Horizon 4 300−310
+512%
45−50
−512%
Hitman 3 180−190
+521%
27−30
−521%
Horizon Zero Dawn 300−310
+500%
50−55
−500%
Metro Exodus 290−300
+530%
45−50
−530%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 300−310
+466%
50−55
−466%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 190−200
+533%
30−33
−533%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+511%
18−20
−511%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 260−270
+534%
40−45
−534%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 150−160
+525%
24−27
−525%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+532%
18−20
−532%
Hitman 3 120−130
+532%
18−20
−532%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+507%
27−30
−507%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+488%
16−18
−488%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180−190
+521%
29
−521%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 95−100
+533%
14−16
−533%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85
+515%
12−14
−515%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+507%
14−16
−507%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+483%
6−7
−483%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+515%
12−14
−515%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+518%
30−35
−518%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+507%
27−30
−507%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+525%
24−27
−525%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+536%
10−12
−536%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 130−140
+519%
21−24
−519%

This is how R9 390X and Quadro 4000 compete in popular games:

  • R9 390X is 617% faster in 1080p
  • R9 390X is 571% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.44 3.83
Recency 16 June 2015 2 November 2010
Cost $429 $1199
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 142 Watt

The Radeon R9 390X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 390X is a desktop card while Quadro 4000 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 R9 390X
Radeon R9 390X
NVIDIA Quadro 4000
Quadro 4000

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.


4.3 242 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 174 votes

Rate Quadro 4000 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.