Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

Place in the ranking	451	258
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	10.69	24.77
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	TU106
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 February 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 cores	1280	2304
Core clock speed	931 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1011 MHz	1215 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	80.88	175.0
Floating-point processing power	2.588 TFLOPS	5.599 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	80	144
Tensor Cores	no data	288
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	36

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	no data	large
Interface	IGP	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	HBM2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	448.0 GB/s
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 outputs
G-SYNC support	-	+

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	-	7.5

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.

RX Vega M GL 10.09

RTX 3000 Max-Q 21.59
+114%

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.

RX Vega M GL 3878

RTX 3000 Max-Q 8302
+114%

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	30−35 −147%	74 +147%
1440p	21−24 −114%	45 +114%
4K	14−16 −136%	33 +136%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Fortnite	55−60 −103%	120−130 +103%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 −105%	160−170 +105%

Full HD
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 −175%	99 +175%
Fortnite	55−60 −89.8%	110−120 +89.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −136%	85 +136%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 −82.1%	140−150 +82.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 −127%	65−70 +127%
World of Tanks	140−150 −66.2%	240−250 +66.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2	35−40 −233%	120 +233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 −82.1%	140−150 +82.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 −100%	60−65 +100%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

55−60
−103%

120−130

+103%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 −225%	65 +225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −225%	65 +225%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2	20−22 −280%	76 +280%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −107%	60−65 +107%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

10−12

−90.9%

21−24
+90.9%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Elden Ring	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	63 +0%	63 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	26 +0%	26 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	77 +0%	77 +0%
Valorant	119 +0%	119 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	22 +0%	22 +0%
Elden Ring	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Far Cry 5	80 +0%	80 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Valorant	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	56 +0%	56 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +0%	18 +0%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Valorant	103 +0%	103 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	49 +0%	49 +0%
Elden Ring	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 +0%	49 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
World of Tanks	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45 +0%	45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Valorant	68 +0%	68 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Dota 2	65 +0%	65 +0%
Elden Ring	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +0%	5 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Fortnite	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Valorant	32 +0%	32 +0%

This is how RX Vega M GL and RTX 3000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

RTX 3000 Max-Q is 147% faster in 1080p
RTX 3000 Max-Q is 114% faster in 1440p
RTX 3000 Max-Q is 136% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3000 Max-Q is 280% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 3000 Max-Q is ahead in 11 tests (17%)
there's a draw in 52 tests (83%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.09	21.59
Recency	1 February 2018	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	60 Watt

RTX 3000 Max-Q has a 114% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 8.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega M GL in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M GL is a notebook graphics card while Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 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.