AMD Radeon RX 7600 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two GPUs along clear generational and architectural lines. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 dominates the overall win count, taking 8 of 10 head-to-head tests, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 secures only 2 wins, but those wins are decisive in specific application areas.

The RX 7600 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its biggest advantages appear in PassMark GPU Compute, where it scores 8790 against the Quadro's 6176, a 29.7% lead. The AMD card also wins in OpenCL performance, posting 88051 versus 74540, a 15.3% margin. These results point to a GPU that handles raw number-crunching tasks more efficiently, which matters for rendering, simulation, and general-purpose compute tasks.

In contrast, the Quadro RTX 4000 shows a dramatic advantage in Vulkan API performance. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 78844 dwarfs the RX 7600's 34401, representing a 129.2% lead. This is the single largest performance gap in the entire comparison, suggesting the NVIDIA card has significantly stronger Vulkan driver optimization or hardware acceleration. The Quadro also wins in DirectX 10 legacy workloads, scoring 108 against 84, a 28.6% edge.

For modern DirectX 12 gaming workloads, the RX 7600 takes the lead. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the AMD card scores 2310 versus 1873, an 18.9% advantage. The RX 7600 also wins in DirectX 11 (172 vs 128, a 25.6% gap) and DirectX 12 PassMark (58 vs 52, a 10.3% edge). The picture is clear: the RX 7600 is built for contemporary gaming APIs, while the Quadro's Vulkan strength suggests a niche in professional or specialized compute environments.

The 2D and legacy performance also favor AMD. PassMark G2D shows 984 for the RX 7600 against 846 for the Quadro, a 14% lead. In DirectX 9, the AMD card scores 226 versus 205, a 9.3% margin. The overall PassMark G3D score goes to AMD as well, 16634 versus 15117, a 9.1% difference. The data indicates the RX 7600 is the more versatile performer across the board, with the Quadro retaining only its Vulkan and legacy DirectX 10 crowns.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The Quadro RTX 4000 is built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture using a 12 nm TSMC process, featuring the TU104 chip. It packs 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 25.0 million per mm². The RX 7600 uses AMD's RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process with the Navi 33 chip. It contains 13,300 million transistors on a much smaller 204 mm² die, achieving 65.2 million transistors per mm², a substantially higher density.

Clock speeds tell a similar story of generational advancement. The Quadro RTX 4000 runs at a 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. The RX 7600 operates at 1720 MHz base, 2250 MHz game clock, and 2655 MHz boost. The AMD card's higher clocks, combined with its architecture, produce significantly higher throughput rates: 169.9 GPixel/s pixel rate and 339.8 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to the Quadro's 98.88 GPixel/s and 222.5 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations differ in bus width and bandwidth. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the Quadro uses a 256-bit bus delivering 416.0 GB/s, while the RX 7600 uses a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s. The Quadro's wider bus gives it a bandwidth advantage, though the AMD card compensates with higher effective memory clocks at 18 Gbps versus 13 Gbps.

Compute resources diverge in several ways. The Quadro RTX 4000 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 36 ray tracing cores, and 288 tensor cores. The RX 7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores, but no tensor cores. The NVIDIA card's tensor cores give it dedicated AI acceleration hardware that the AMD card lacks entirely. FP32 performance heavily favors the RX 7600 at 21.75 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS, a threefold advantage. FP16 performance is also higher on AMD at 21.75 TFLOPS with 1:1 ratio, compared to the Quadro's 14.24 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio.

Interface and connectivity also differ. The Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs favor AMD with 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the Quadro offers 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. Power consumption is similar at 160 W for the Quadro and 165 W for the RX 7600, both using a single 8-pin connector and requiring a 450 W power supply. Physical dimensions differ: the Quadro is 241 mm long and 111 mm tall as a single-slot card, while the RX 7600 is 204 mm long and 115 mm tall as a dual-slot card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win belongs to the Quadro RTX 4000 in Geekbench Vulkan, where its 78844 score represents a 129.2% lead over the RX 7600's 34401. This is a dominant margin that suggests fundamental differences in Vulkan implementation quality or hardware design. The Quadro also wins PassMark DirectX 10 with 108 versus 84, a 28.6% advantage.

Every other benchmark goes to the RX 7600, with varying margins. The largest AMD win is in PassMark GPU Compute, where 8790 beats 6176 by 29.7%. OpenCL follows at 15.3% (88051 vs 74540). In gaming-oriented tests, the RX 7600 leads 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 by 18.9% (2310 vs 1873) and DirectX 11 by 25.6% (172 vs 128). Smaller margins appear in DirectX 12 (58 vs 52, a 10.3% edge), DirectX 9 (226 vs 205, a 9.3% lead), PassMark G2D (984 vs 846, a 14% margin), and PassMark G3D (16634 vs 15117, a 9.1% difference).

The pattern suggests the RX 7600 is consistently faster in modern API workloads, with the Quadro's Vulkan performance standing out as an outlier. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the Quadro RTX 4000 averages 17789 across all tests, placing it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. The RX 7600 averages 15171, in the 57th percentile. Despite the RX 7600 winning most head-to-head tests, the Quadro's massive Vulkan score inflates its overall average and percentile ranking.

Nearest rival comparisons provide additional context. The Quadro RTX 4000 sits close to the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (0.7% difference) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (0.9% difference). The RX 7600 is nearly tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (0.2% difference) and AMD Radeon 680M (0.7% difference). These are different competitive neighborhoods, with the Quadro landing near other professional and mid-range cards while the RX 7600 aligns with mainstream gaming GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 wins decisively in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 78844, which is 129.2% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7600's 34401. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark.

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 leads in compute tests. It scores 8790 in PassMark GPU Compute versus 6176 for the Quadro, a 29.7% advantage. The RX 7600 also wins in OpenCL with 88051 against 74540, a 15.3% margin.

Q: How do the two cards compare in gaming benchmarks?

A: The RX 7600 wins in all gaming-related tests. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 it scores 2310 versus 1873, an 18.9% lead. It also wins DirectX 11 (172 vs 128) and DirectX 12 PassMark (58 vs 52). The Quadro only wins in the legacy DirectX 10 test (108 vs 84).

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has a 256-bit memory bus providing 416.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 uses a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, but the Quadro's wider bus gives it a bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which GPU has more compute units?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, 36 ray tracing cores, and 288 tensor cores. The RX 7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ray tracing cores, but lacks tensor cores entirely. The Quadro also has higher transistor count at 13,600 million versus 13,300 million.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has a higher average benchmark score of 17789, placing it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. The RX 7600 averages 15171, in the 57th percentile. The Quadro's strong Vulkan performance boosts its overall average despite losing most individual tests.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The Quadro RTX 4000 uses NVIDIA's Turing architecture on a 12 nm process, while the RX 7600 uses AMD's RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 6 nm process. Die size differs significantly: the Quadro measures 545 mm² versus 204 mm² for the RX 7600. Transistor density favors AMD at 65.2 million per mm² against 25.0 million per mm².

Clock speeds are substantially higher on the RX 7600, with a 1720 MHz base and 2655 MHz boost compared to the Quadro's 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. The AMD card also has a 2250 MHz game clock. Memory clocks differ as well: 13 Gbps effective for the Quadro versus 18 Gbps effective for the RX 7600.

Compute specifications show the Quadro with more shading units (2304 vs 2048), more TMUs (144 vs 128), more ray tracing cores (36 vs 32), and the addition of 288 tensor cores, which the RX 7600 lacks entirely. However, the RX 7600 wins decisively in FP32 throughput at 21.75 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS, and in FP16 at 21.75 TFLOPS versus 14.24 TFLOPS. Pixel rate and texture rate both favor AMD: 169.9 GPixel/s versus 98.88 GPixel/s, and 339.8 GTexel/s versus 222.5 GTexel/s.

Memory bus width differs, with the Quadro using 256-bit and the RX 7600 using 128-bit, resulting in bandwidth of 416.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s. Power consumption is close at 160 W and 165 W respectively. Slot width differs: single-slot for the Quadro, dual-slot for the RX 7600. Bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are different as well: the Quadro offers 3x DisplayPort 1.4a plus USB Type-C, while the RX 7600 provides HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. Physical dimensions differ, with the Quadro at 241 mm length and 111 mm height, and the RX 7600 at 204 mm length and 115 mm height. Production status also varies: the Quadro is end-of-life, while the RX 7600 remains active.