Quadro RTX 8000 vs Titan X Pascal

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal with Quadro RTX 8000, including specs and performance data.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.77

RTX 8000 outperforms Titan X Pascal by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking15460
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.881.88
Power efficiency9.4213.40
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP102TU102
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $9,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Titan X Pascal has 266% better value for money than RTX 8000.

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 cores35844608
Core clock speed1417 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed1531 MHz1770 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate342.9509.8
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs9696
TMUs224288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72

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 3.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount12 GB48 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/s672.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+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.

Titan X Pascal 33.77
RTX 8000 49.98
+48%

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.

Titan X Pascal 13026
RTX 8000 19278
+48%

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 HD127
−41.7%
180−190
+41.7%
1440p71
−40.8%
100−110
+40.8%
4K57
−40.4%
80−85
+40.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.4455.55
1440p16.8999.99
4K21.04124.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 79
−39.2%
110−120
+39.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 104
−44.2%
150−160
+44.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 95
−47.4%
140−150
+47.4%
Battlefield 5 174
−43.7%
250−260
+43.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 108
−38.9%
150−160
+38.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
−41%
110−120
+41%
Far Cry 5 121
−40.5%
170−180
+40.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 138
−44.9%
200−210
+44.9%
Forza Horizon 4 240
−45.8%
350−400
+45.8%
Hitman 3 104
−44.2%
150−160
+44.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 296
−35.1%
400−450
+35.1%
Metro Exodus 143
−46.9%
210−220
+46.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 125
−44%
180−190
+44%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 161
−42.9%
230−240
+42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 226
−32.7%
300−310
+32.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 121
−40.5%
170−180
+40.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
−41.2%
120−130
+41.2%
Battlefield 5 165
−45.5%
240−250
+45.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 98
−42.9%
140−150
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
−44.9%
100−105
+44.9%
Far Cry 5 92
−41.3%
130−140
+41.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 108
−38.9%
150−160
+38.9%
Forza Horizon 4 225
−33.3%
300−310
+33.3%
Hitman 3 104
−44.2%
150−160
+44.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 275
−45.5%
400−450
+45.5%
Metro Exodus 143
−46.9%
210−220
+46.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 102
−47.1%
150−160
+47.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 194
−44.3%
280−290
+44.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
−45.8%
140−150
+45.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 216
−38.9%
300−310
+38.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 67
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 63
−42.9%
90−95
+42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75
−46.7%
110−120
+46.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
−44.1%
85−90
+44.1%
Far Cry 5 67
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
Forza Horizon 4 112
−42.9%
160−170
+42.9%
Hitman 3 93
−39.8%
130−140
+39.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150
−46.7%
220−230
+46.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167
−43.7%
240−250
+43.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
−47.4%
140−150
+47.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 64
−40.6%
90−95
+40.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 118
−44.1%
170−180
+44.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
−40.6%
90−95
+40.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
−47.1%
75−80
+47.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
−47.1%
75−80
+47.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 58
−46.6%
85−90
+46.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−41%
55−60
+41%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
−45.1%
280−290
+45.1%
Hitman 3 66
−43.9%
95−100
+43.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
−44.1%
170−180
+44.1%
Metro Exodus 101
−38.6%
140−150
+38.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 122
−47.5%
180−190
+47.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
−41.3%
65−70
+41.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 212
−41.5%
300−310
+41.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 92
−41.3%
130−140
+41.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 63
−42.9%
90−95
+42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 48
−45.8%
70−75
+45.8%
Hitman 3 39
−41%
55−60
+41%
Horizon Zero Dawn 129
−47.3%
190−200
+47.3%
Metro Exodus 67
−41.8%
95−100
+41.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
−47.1%
100−105
+47.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
−44.7%
55−60
+44.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
−40.6%
45−50
+40.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
−47.1%
50−55
+47.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 33
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%
Forza Horizon 4 73
−37%
100−105
+37%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70
−42.9%
100−105
+42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 47
−38.3%
65−70
+38.3%

This is how Titan X Pascal and RTX 8000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 8000 is 42% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 8000 is 41% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 8000 is 40% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.77 49.98
Recency 2 August 2016 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 260 Watt

Titan X Pascal has 4% lower power consumption.

RTX 8000, on the other hand, has a 48% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 33.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Titan X Pascal in performance tests.

Be aware that Titan X Pascal is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 8000 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.


NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
Quadro RTX 8000

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.


2.6 2995 votes

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 464 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 8000 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.