AMD Radeon RX 6800 vs NVIDIA T1000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows only two shared benchmark tests between the NVIDIA T1000 and the AMD Radeon RX 6800, and the results could not be more polarized. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA T1000 posts a score of 37704 against the RX 6800's 24508, a 53.8% advantage for the Turing-based workstation card. That is not a marginal win; it is a dominant one, placing the T1000 ahead by more than half of the RX 6800's own score. This result is consistent with the T1000's overall standing in the database, where it holds an 80th percentile rank among all GPUs and an average benchmark score of 36289.

The reverse is true in Geekbench Vulkan. Here the AMD Radeon RX 6800 delivers 115107 points versus the T1000's 34874, a 69.7% swing in AMD's favor. The delta is even larger than the OpenCL gap, making the Vulkan test the single biggest margin between the two cards in either direction. The T1000's Vulkan score of 34874 is actually lower than its own OpenCL result, while the RX 6800's Vulkan score is nearly five times its OpenCL figure. This suggests the two architectures have very different strengths depending on the API in use.

Looking at the broader database context, the AMD Radeon RX 6800 sits at the 75th percentile overall, slightly below the T1000's 80th percentile, yet its average benchmark score of 30095 is dragged down by the weak OpenCL result. The RX 6800's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti, with an average score of 29945 and a delta of 0.5%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, which averages 29783 and trails by 1%. The AMD Radeon RX 6700 sits slightly ahead at 30433, a 1.1% margin over the RX 6800. These close deltas indicate that the RX 6800's average score is competitive with high-end NVIDIA cards from previous generations, even if its OpenCL showing is poor.

The T1000, by contrast, has nearest rivals that are much closer to its own average. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X both average around 36530, within 0.7% of the T1000's 36289. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo trails by 1.2% at 35860, and the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 is 2.2% behind at 35520. The T1000's percentile rank of 80 is notably higher than the RX 6800's 75, despite the RX 6800 having far more raw compute power on paper. This is because percentile rank reflects position within the entire GPU database, and the T1000's consistent scores across both tests keep it well positioned.

The head-to-head record is split at one win each. The NVIDIA T1000 takes the OpenCL test, and the AMD Radeon RX 6800 takes the Vulkan test. No other shared benchmarks exist in the database, so the comparison rests entirely on these two API-specific workloads. That is a narrow basis for evaluation, but the margins are large enough to draw clear conclusions about each card's character.

The Verdict

The data points to two very different products with two very different intended roles. The NVIDIA T1000 wins the OpenCL contest by 53.8%, and that is the test that matters for compute-oriented workloads using that API. It also holds a higher overall percentile rank, 80 versus 75, and its average score of 36289 exceeds the RX 6800's 30095 by roughly 20.6%. For users whose applications rely on OpenCL, the T1000 is the clear choice from the recorded numbers alone.

The AMD Radeon RX 6800, meanwhile, dominates the Vulkan test by 69.7%, posting 115107 points against 34874. Vulkan is the modern graphics API in the database, and the RX 6800's result is in a different class entirely. It also offers far more memory, 16 GB versus 4 GB, and a substantially wider memory bus, 256 bit versus 128 bit, with bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s. For gaming or any Vulkan-based workload, the RX 6800 is the only rational pick from these measurements.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the data, a user running OpenCL compute tasks should choose the NVIDIA T1000. Its 37704 OpenCL score is the highest recorded result between the two, and its 80th percentile rank confirms strong overall standing. A user running Vulkan workloads, or needing larger frame buffer capacity and bandwidth, should choose the AMD Radeon RX 6800. The 69.7% Vulkan margin is decisive, and the 16 GB memory configuration dwarfs the T1000's 4 GB.

There is no universal winner here. The two cards never trade blows in the same discipline; each owns one API outright. The T1000 is a low-power, single-slot workstation card with a 50 W TDP and no power connectors, while the RX 6800 is a dual-slot, 250 W card requiring two 8-pin connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. The physical and power requirements alone will steer buyers toward one or the other before benchmarks even enter the conversation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 wins with a score of 37704 against the AMD Radeon RX 6800's 24508, a 53.8% advantage.

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800 wins with 115107 points versus the T1000's 34874, a 69.7% margin.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has an average benchmark score of 36289, while the AMD Radeon RX 6800 averages 30095. The T1000 also holds a higher percentile rank at 80 versus 75.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 6800 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA T1000 has a 50 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The AMD Radeon RX 6800 has a 250 W TDP, requires two 8-pin connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 600 W.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD Radeon RX 6800?

A: The launch MSRP is 579 USD. The NVIDIA T1000 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The NVIDIA T1000 uses a TU117 chip built on a 12 nm process at TSMC, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die and a transistor density of 23.5M per mm². The AMD Radeon RX 6800 uses a Navi 21 chip on a 7 nm process, also at TSMC, with 26,800 million transistors on a 520 mm² die and a transistor density of 51.5M per mm². The RX 6800 packs more than five times the transistor count on a die that is 2.6 times larger, and its density is more than double.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The T1000 runs at a 1065 MHz base and 1395 MHz boost, with memory at 1250 MHz or 10 Gbps effective. The RX 6800 runs at a 1700 MHz base, 1815 MHz game clock, and 2105 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz or 16 Gbps effective. Memory capacity and bandwidth favor AMD overwhelmingly: 16 GB versus 4 GB, 256 bit versus 128 bit, and 512.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s.

Compute resources also favor the RX 6800. It has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 60 ray tracing cores. The T1000 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. Pixel rate is 202.1 GPixel/s for the RX 6800 versus 44.64 GPixel/s for the T1000. Texture rate is 505.2 GTexel/s versus 78.12 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 16.17 TFLOPS versus 2.500 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 32.33 TFLOPS versus 5.000 TFLOPS, both with a 2:1 ratio.

Power and physical dimensions differ completely. The T1000 has a 50 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RX 6800 has a 250 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires two 8-pin connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 600 W. The T1000 measures 156 mm by 69 mm, while the RX 6800 measures 267 mm by 120 mm by 40 mm. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for the T1000 and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 6800. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on the T1000 versus 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C on the RX 6800. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) for the T1000 and 12 Ultimate (12_2) for the RX 6800; OpenGL is 4.6 for both, and Vulkan is 1.4 for both.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA T1000 is built on the Turing architecture, released in the Quadro Turing generation, and uses the TU117 chip. The AMD Radeon RX 6800 is built on RDNA 2.0, part of the Navi II generation, and uses the Navi 21 chip. Turing is NVIDIA's workstation-oriented architecture from the Quadro line, while RDNA 2.0 is AMD's gaming-focused architecture from the Radeon RX 6000 series. The process node difference is significant: 12 nm for the T1000 versus 7 nm for the RX 6800, both fabricated by TSMC. The smaller node allows the RX 6800 to pack 26,800 million transistors at a density of 51.5M per mm², compared to the T1000's 4,700 million at 23.5M per mm².

Ray tracing support is a major architectural split. The RX 6800 includes 60 ray tracing cores, a defining feature of RDNA 2.0, while the T1000 has no ray tracing cores at all. This aligns with the DirectX feature level difference: the RX 6800 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing and mesh shaders, while the T1000 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Neither card has tensor cores in the recorded data.

The memory architecture reflects the generational gap. The T1000 uses a 128 bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 6800 uses a 256 bit bus with 512.0 GB/s. The RX 6800 also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the interface bandwidth of the T1000's PCIe 3.0 x16. The T1000's 50 W TDP and single-slot design make it suitable for dense workstation environments, while the RX 6800's 250 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and two 8-pin connectors target high-performance desktop builds.

The release timeline places the RX 6800 first, launching on 2020-10-27, followed by the T1000 on 2021-05-05. Both are end-of-life in the database. The T1000's predecessor is Quadro Volta and its successor is Workstation Ampere. The RX 6800's predecessor is Navi and its successor is Navi III. The RX 6800 is part of the Radeon RX 6000 series, while the T1000 has no series listing. The architecture differences explain the benchmark split: Turing's compute scheduling favors OpenCL, while RDNA 2.0's design, with its ray tracing cores and higher throughput, favors Vulkan. The recorded data offers no crossover tests, so the architectural strengths remain cleanly separated.