NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two Turing-based cards. Across ten head-to-head tests, the GeForce RTX 2070 claims eight victories, while the Quadro RTX 4000 takes two. The most decisive win for the RTX 2070 comes in the Passmark DirectX 12 test, where it scores 60 against the Quadro's 52, a 15.4% advantage. This is a substantial gap in a modern API workload, suggesting the GeForce card handles contemporary rendering paths with noticeably more headroom. The RTX 2070 also dominates in 3DMark Steel Nomad, but in the opposite direction — there, the Quadro RTX 4000 wins decisively with a score of 1873 versus 1569, a 16.2% margin in its favor. This is the single largest delta in either direction across the entire benchmark suite.

Beyond those two outliers, the remaining wins for the RTX 2070 are more moderate. In Geekbench OpenCL, it posts 79966 against 74540, a 7.3% lead. The Vulkan test shows a similar pattern: 82521 versus 78844, or a 4.7% edge. Passmark G3D, which aggregates general 3D performance, gives the RTX 2070 a 6.5% advantage (16094 to 15117). The compute-oriented Passmark GPU Compute test is closer, with the RTX 2070 ahead by 3.8% (6411 to 6176). The legacy DirectX tests are tight: DirectX 10 shows a 2.8% lead (111 to 108), DirectX 9 a 2.9% lead (211 to 205), and DirectX 11 a marginal 0.8% edge (129 to 128). The Quadro's other win comes in Passmark G2D, a 2D graphics test, where it scores 846 against 819, a 3.2% margin.

The average benchmark scores reflect this overall pattern. The RTX 2070 holds an average score of 18789, while the Quadro RTX 4000 sits at 17789. That places the RTX 2070 at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs, versus the 61st percentile for the Quadro. The nearest-rival data further contextualizes these numbers: the RTX 2070's average is only 0.4% below the NVIDIA Tesla K80 (18866) and 0.6% above the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18685). The Quadro RTX 4000, meanwhile, sits 0.7% above the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17666) and 0.9% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17639). In short, the RTX 2070 consistently outperforms the Quadro in most tests, but the Quadro's decisive 3DMark victory indicates it has specific strengths that the GeForce cannot match.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 2070 is the clear winner for general-purpose and gaming-oriented workloads. Its eight benchmark wins span compute (Geekbench OpenCL, Passmark GPU Compute), modern graphics APIs (DirectX 12, Vulkan), and legacy DirectX versions (9, 10, 11). The 15.4% DirectX 12 advantage is particularly notable, as it suggests better optimization for current and future game engines. The 7.3% OpenCL lead and 4.7% Vulkan edge further reinforce its strength in heterogeneous compute and cross-platform graphics. For users running a mix of gaming, content creation, and general GPU-accelerated tasks, the RTX 2070's data profile is consistently ahead.

The Quadro RTX 4000 wins in two specific areas. Its 16.2% 3DMark Steel Nomad victory is the standout — this is a DirectX 12 test that stresses modern rendering features, and the Quadro's margin here is more than double any advantage the RTX 2070 manages elsewhere. The Quadro also takes the Passmark G2D test by 3.2%, a niche 2D graphics workload where the GeForce falls slightly behind. These wins suggest the Quadro is tuned for professional 3D rendering and workstation display tasks, where sustained geometry and viewport performance matter more than raw shader throughput. The 3DMark result, in particular, indicates that the Quadro's architecture handles certain modern rendering paths more efficiently, even though its overall average score is lower.

The data does not show the Quadro winning any compute or legacy graphics tests. Its performance in Geekbench OpenCL is 7.3% behind, and in Passmark GPU Compute it trails by 3.8%. This means the Quadro's strengths are narrow but real: it is not a general-purpose outperformer, but it has a specific edge in 3DMark Steel Nomad and 2D workloads that could matter for professional users.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture and use a 12 nm process from TSMC, but they employ different chips. The GeForce RTX 2070 uses the TU106 die, which contains 10,800 million transistors on a 445 mm² die. The Quadro RTX 4000 uses the larger TU104 die, packing 13,600 million transistors onto a 545 mm² die. This makes the Quadro's die roughly 22% larger in area and 26% higher in transistor count. Transistor density is similar — 24.3M per mm² for the TU106 versus 25.0M per mm² for the TU104 — so the Quadro's advantage comes from raw die size rather than packing efficiency.

The core configurations are identical on paper. Both cards feature 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, 36 RT cores, and 288 tensor cores. This means the architectural difference lies in clock speeds and memory timing, not in core counts. The RTX 2070 runs at a base clock of 1410 MHz and a boost clock of 1620 MHz, while the Quadro RTX 4000 is significantly lower at 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. The memory clocks differ as well: the RTX 2070 runs its GDDR6 at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), while the Quadro uses 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective). Both have 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but the RTX 2070's higher memory clock yields 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 416.0 GB/s for the Quadro.

These clock differences translate directly into throughput figures. The RTX 2070 achieves 7.465 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 14.93 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1), while the Quadro RTX 4000 manages 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.24 TFLOPS FP16. Pixel rate is 103.7 GPixel/s for the RTX 2070 versus 98.88 GPixel/s for the Quadro, and texture rate is 233.3 GTexel/s versus 222.5 GTexel/s. The RTX 2070's higher clocks give it a modest edge across all these metrics, but the Quadro's larger die and higher transistor count do not translate into a performance advantage outside of the 3DMark Steel Nomad test.

The feature sets are otherwise identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The physical design differs, though — the RTX 2070 is a dual-slot card measuring 229 mm in length, while the Quadro RTX 4000 is single-slot and 241 mm long. The Quadro also draws less power at 160 W versus 175 W for the RTX 2070, despite its larger die. Both use a single 8-pin power connector and recommend a 450 W power supply. Display outputs differ: the RTX 2070 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C, while the Quadro provides 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 has an average benchmark score of 18789, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 scores 17789. This places the RTX 2070 at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs and the Quadro at the 61st percentile.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two cards?

A: The largest delta is in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where the Quadro RTX 4000 scores 1873 against the RTX 2070's 1569, giving the Quadro a 16.2% advantage. The second-largest is in Passmark DirectX 12, where the RTX 2070 leads by 15.4% (60 to 52).

Q: Do the cards have identical core configurations?

A: Yes, both have 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 36 RT cores, and 288 tensor cores. The differences come from clock speeds, memory clocks, and the physical die — the RTX 2070 uses the TU106 chip, while the Quadro uses the larger TU104 chip.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GeForce RTX 2070 has 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth due to its 1750 MHz memory clock (14 Gbps effective), while the Quadro RTX 4000 offers 416.0 GB/s from its 1625 MHz memory clock (13 Gbps effective). Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: How do the cards compare in power consumption?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has a TDP of 160 W, while the RTX 2070 has a TDP of 175 W. Both use a single 8-pin power connector and recommend a 450 W power supply.

Q: Which card wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The GeForce RTX 2070 wins 8 out of 10 head-to-head benchmarks. The Quadro RTX 4000 wins only 2: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test and the Passmark G2D test.

Specification Differences

| Specification | GeForce RTX 2070 | Quadro RTX 4000 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | TU106 | TU104 |

| Transistors | 10,800 million | 13,600 million |

| Die Size | 445 mm² | 545 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1410 MHz | 1005 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1620 MHz | 1545 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 416.0 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 103.7 GPixel/s | 98.88 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 233.3 GTexel/s | 222.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.465 TFLOPS | 7.119 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 14.93 TFLOPS (2:1) | 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 175 W | 160 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Length | 229 mm (9 inches) | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | 113 mm (4.4 inches) | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | 35 mm (1.4 inches) | Not specified |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C |

| Release Date | 2018-10-16 | 2018-11-12 |

| Launch MSRP | 499 USD | 899 USD |

| Average Benchmark Score | 18789 | 17789 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 63 | 61 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The GeForce RTX 2070 is the stronger performer in the majority of workloads, winning eight of ten benchmarks and holding a 5.6% higher average score (18789 versus 17789). Its advantages are most pronounced in modern graphics APIs — a 15.4% lead in DirectX 12 and a 4.7% lead in Vulkan — as well as in compute tasks like OpenCL (7.3% ahead) and GPU compute (3.8% ahead). For users who prioritize gaming, general GPU acceleration, or a mix of creative and compute workloads, the RTX 2070 is the better choice based strictly on benchmark performance. It also achieves this with a lower launch MSRP of 499 USD compared to the Quadro's 899 USD.

The Quadro RTX 4000, however, has a specific and significant strength: its 16.2% victory in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This is the largest performance gap in either direction, and it suggests the Quadro's architecture handles certain modern 3D rendering paths more efficiently, despite its lower clock speeds. The Quadro also wins the Passmark G2D test by 3.2%, and it does so while consuming less power (160 W versus 175 W) and fitting into a single-slot design. For professional users running 3D modeling, CAD, or other workstation applications that exercise the specific rendering features in Steel Nomad, the Quadro's targeted advantage could outweigh its overall lower average score. Its larger TU104 die with 13,600 million transistors also provides a more robust physical foundation, even if that does not translate to broad benchmark wins.

The verdict depends on workload. The RTX 2070 is the data-backed pick for general performance, gaming, and compute. The Quadro RTX 4000 is the data-backed pick for professional 3D rendering that matches the Steel Nomad profile, where its 16.2% edge is undeniable. There is no single winner across all tests — the choice hinges on which benchmarks reflect the user's actual tasks.