AMD Radeon RX 7700 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 holds a higher average benchmark score of 17789, while the AMD Radeon RX 7700 averages 15852. This places the Quadro at the 61st percentile of all GPUs, versus the 58th percentile for the RX 7700.

Q: In the head-to-head tests, which product claims more wins?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 dominates the head-to-head comparison with 8 wins out of 9 tests. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 secures only a single victory, specifically in the Passmark DirectX 10 test.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 comes with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, double the 8 GB found on the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000. Both use a 256-bit memory bus, but the RX 7700’s bandwidth is 624.1 GB/s versus 416.0 GB/s for the Quadro.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 delivers 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is significantly higher than the 7.119 TFLOPS from the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000. This is a major differentiator in raw compute capability.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 boosts to 2459 MHz, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 boosts to 1545 MHz. The RX 7700 also has a higher base clock at 1900 MHz compared to 1005 MHz.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two products?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is listed as end-of-life, while the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is marked as active. The RX 7700 was released on 2025-09-17, whereas the Quadro dates to 2018-11-12.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU104 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It houses 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 25.0M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 32 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. This newer node allows for 28,100 million transistors on a smaller 346 mm² die, yielding a substantially higher density of 81.2M per mm².

The core configuration differs markedly. The Quadro RTX 4000 features 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. It also includes 36 ray tracing cores and 288 tensor cores, reflecting Turing’s emphasis on hybrid rendering and AI acceleration. The Radeon RX 7700 has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with 40 ray tracing cores. Notably, the RX 7700 has no tensor core equivalent listed in the database, as RDNA 3.0 relies on different compute paths.

Clock behavior diverges significantly. The Quadro operates at a base of 1005 MHz and boosts to 1545 MHz, while the RX 7700 runs at a base of 1900 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a boost of 2459 MHz. This clock advantage, combined with the architectural efficiency of the 5 nm node, gives the RX 7700 a large lead in raw throughput metrics. Its pixel rate is 236.1 GPixel/s and texture rate is 393.4 GTexel/s, versus 98.88 GPixel/s and 222.5 GTexel/s for the Quadro.

Memory architecture also separates the two. The Quadro RTX 4000 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 at 13 Gbps effective, while the RX 7700 uses 16 GB at 19.5 Gbps effective. Both have a 256-bit bus, but the RX 7700’s bandwidth of 624.1 GB/s outpaces the Quadro’s 416.0 GB/s. The RX 7700 supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Power characteristics differ as well. The Quadro RTX 4000 has a TDP of 160 W with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested 450 W PSU. The RX 7700 draws 200 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, and suggests a 550 W PSU. Physical dimensions also vary: the Quadro is a single-slot card at 241 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the RX 7700 is dual-slot, measuring 267 mm by 135 mm by 50 mm.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs differ, with the Quadro offering 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C, while the RX 7700 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in use cases. For raw performance in modern workloads, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the stronger choice. It wins 8 of 9 head-to-head tests, including decisive victories in DirectX 12, GPU compute, and 3DMark Steel Nomad. Its 16 GB memory and 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 make it suitable for heavy rendering, compute, and high-resolution workloads.

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000, despite its lower raw scores, retains relevance in specific legacy scenarios. It wins the Passmark DirectX 10 test by 17.4%, and its average benchmark score is higher than the RX 7700 due to the distribution of test results. Its end-of-life status and single-slot form factor may appeal to users needing a compact, lower-power workstation card for older APIs.

Professionals requiring maximum compute throughput and modern API performance should select the AMD Radeon RX 7700. Those constrained by power (160 W vs 200 W), slot space, or legacy DirectX 10 compatibility may still find the Quadro RTX 4000 acceptable, though its age and smaller memory pool are limiting factors.

Specification Differences

• Process Node: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 on 12 nm, AMD Radeon RX 7700 on 5 nm
• Transistors: 13,600 million vs 28,100 million
• Die Size: 545 mm² vs 346 mm²
• Transistor Density: 25.0M / mm² vs 81.2M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1005 MHz vs 1900 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1545 MHz vs 2459 MHz
• Game Clock: Not applicable vs 2041 MHz
• Memory Speed: 13 Gbps effective vs 19.5 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 8 GB vs 16 GB
• Memory Bandwidth: 416.0 GB/s vs 624.1 GB/s
• Shading Units: 2304 vs 2560
• Texture Mapping Units: 144 vs 160
• Raster Operation Pipelines: 64 vs 96
• Ray Tracing Cores: 36 vs 40
• Tensor Cores: 288 vs Not applicable
• Pixel Rate: 98.88 GPixel/s vs 236.1 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 222.5 GTexel/s vs 393.4 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 7.119 TFLOPS vs 25.18 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 25.18 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 160 W vs 200 W
• Slot Width: Single-slot vs Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: 1x 8-pin vs 2x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 450 W vs 550 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 3x DisplayPort 1.4a + 1x USB Type-C vs 1x HDMI 2.1a + 2x DisplayPort 2.1 + 1x USB Type-C
• Dimensions: 241 mm x 111 mm vs 267 mm x 135 mm x 50 mm
• Production Status: End-of-life vs Active
• Release Date: 2018-11-12 vs 2025-09-17

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins 8 of the 9 recorded comparisons, often by large margins. The largest victory comes in the Passmark DirectX 12 test, where the RX 7700 scores 96 against the Quadro’s 52, a delta of -45.8% in favor of AMD. This indicates a substantial advantage in modern DirectX 12 workloads, likely due to the newer architecture and higher clock speeds.

In Passmark GPU Compute, the RX 7700 posts 10963 versus 6176 for the Quadro, a 43.7% lead. This aligns with the FP32 compute gap, where the RX 7700 offers 25.18 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS. The RX 7700 also wins the Passmark DirectX 11 test by 31.2% (186 vs 128), reinforcing its strength in mainstream graphics APIs.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows the RX 7700 scoring 2865 against 1873, a 34.6% advantage. Similarly, Geekbench OpenCL results favor AMD by 29.7%, with scores of 106028 versus 74540. The Passmark G3D test, a broad measure of 3D performance, sees the RX 7700 at 20974 versus 15117, a 27.9% gap. Even the Passmark G2D test, which measures 2D performance, goes to AMD by 29.9% (1206 vs 846).

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000’s sole win is in Passmark DirectX 10, scoring 108 against 92, a 17.4% margin. This suggests that in older DirectX 10 titles or applications, the Quadro retains a niche advantage. However, this is the only test where NVIDIA leads, and the margin is modest compared to AMD’s wins.

Interestingly, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The Quadro RTX 4000 averages 17789, which is higher than the RX 7700’s 15852. This discrepancy arises because the average includes tests not in the head-to-head set, and the Quadro’s nearest rivals (AMD Radeon HD 7790, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, AMD Radeon 780M, AMD Radeon Pro 560) all score within 1.4% of its average. The RX 7700, by contrast, sits near the AMD Radeon R9 370X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, with deltas of -0.1% and -1.7% respectively.

The head-to-head results are unambiguous in direct comparison. AMD’s card delivers between 21.5% and 45.8% higher scores in 8 of 9 tests. The only NVIDIA win is in a legacy API. For any user prioritizing modern benchmarks, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the performance leader. For those weighing the average score across all recorded tests, the Quadro RTX 4000 edges ahead, but that aggregate hides the RX 7700’s decisive wins in current-generation workloads.