NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro P400 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB and the NVIDIA Quadro P400 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data confirms a chasm in raw performance. The RTX 3080 12 GB, with an average benchmark score of 4791, sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P400’s average score of 4684 places it at the 27th percentile. The delta between the two is a modest 2.2% in favor of the GeForce card, but this narrow gap in aggregate scores masks the fact that these two cards are measured on entirely different workloads. The RTX 3080 12 GB was tested on 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, scoring 4791, whereas the Quadro P400 was evaluated via Geekbench OpenCL (4249) and Geekbench Vulkan (5119). The data does not include a direct head-to-head benchmark suite, so the comparison relies on these separate, workload-specific results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking numerical contrast comes from architectural throughput. The RTX 3080 12 GB delivers 30.64 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, a figure that is roughly 48 times higher than the Quadro P400’s 641.0 GFLOPS. In texture processing, the GeForce card achieves 478.8 GTexel/s against the Quadro’s 20.03 GTexel/s, a 23.9x advantage. Pixel fill rates follow the same pattern: 164.2 GPixel/s versus 20.03 GPixel/s, an 8.2x gap. These are not subtle differences; they indicate that the RTX 3080 12 GB is designed for rendering workloads that would completely saturate the Quadro P400’s modest execution resources.

Memory bandwidth further widens the divide. The RTX 3080 12 GB operates with a 384-bit bus and GDDR6X memory, yielding 912.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P400 uses a 64-bit bus with GDDR5, producing just 32.06 GB/s. That is a 28.5x difference in memory throughput, which directly impacts how quickly each card can feed its shader units. The RTX 3080 12 GB’s 12 GB frame buffer is six times larger than the Quadro’s 2 GB, and the memory clock is substantially higher at 19 Gbps effective versus 4 Gbps effective.

In the specific tests recorded, the RTX 3080 12 GB’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 4791 edges out the Quadro P400’s average of 4684 by 2.3%. However, the Quadro P400 actually posts a higher score in Geekbench Vulkan (5119) than the RTX 3080 12 GB’s single DX12 result, though this is not a valid cross-application comparison. The nearest rivals for the RTX 3080 12 GB include the AMD Radeon R5 M255 at 4788 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon R5 M335 at 4752 (0.8% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX at 4844 (1.1% ahead). For the Quadro P400, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB sits at 4657 (0.6% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M trails at 4628 (1.2% behind). These rival clusters suggest both cards are compared against low-end mobile and entry-level desktop parts in the database’s ranking system.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 3080 12 GB is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The Quadro P400, by contrast, uses the Pascal architecture with the GP107 chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process. It packs just 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, for a density of 25.0 million per mm². The process node difference alone — 8 nm versus 14 nm — explains part of the performance gap, but the die size disparity (628 mm² versus 132 mm²) is even more significant; the GeForce GPU has roughly 4.8 times the silicon area.

Core configuration diverges dramatically. The RTX 3080 12 GB has 8,960 shading units, 280 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. It also features 70 ray tracing cores and 280 tensor cores, which are absent entirely from the Quadro P400 (listed as null). The Quadro P400 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Clock speeds are closer than one might expect: the RTX 3080 12 GB runs at a 1260 MHz base and 1710 MHz boost, while the Quadro P400 operates at 1228 MHz base and 1252 MHz boost. The boost clock difference is 458 MHz, but the core count disparity of 8,704 shading units overwhelms any clock advantage.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The RTX 3080 12 GB uses GDDR6X on a 384-bit interface, while the Quadro P400 uses GDDR5 on a 64-bit interface. The GeForce card’s memory bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s is 28.5 times higher. FP16 performance also differs wildly: the RTX 3080 12 GB achieves 30.64 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Quadro P400 manages only 10.02 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio. This makes the GeForce card suitable for mixed-precision workloads, while the Quadro is effectively FP32-only. Power requirements reflect the architectural gulf: the RTX 3080 12 GB carries a 350 W TDP and requires a 750 W power supply, while the Quadro P400 sips 30 W and works with a 200 W PSU. The physical cards also differ: the GeForce is a dual-slot, 285 mm long unit with a 1x 12-pin power connector, while the Quadro is single-slot, 150 mm long, and draws power solely from the PCIe slot.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3080 12 GB dominates every compute-heavy metric in the FACT PACK. It wins decisively in FP32 throughput (30.64 TFLOPS versus 641.0 GFLOPS), texture rate (478.8 GTexel/s versus 20.03 GTexel/s), and pixel rate (164.2 GPixel/s versus 20.03 GPixel/s). For any workload that relies on parallel shading — such as 3D rendering, real-time ray tracing, or large dataset processing — the GeForce card is the only viable option between the two. Its 12 GB of GDDR6X memory and 912.4 GB/s bandwidth also make it suitable for high-resolution textures and complex scenes, while the Quadro P400’s 2 GB GDDR5 frame buffer would quickly become a bottleneck.

The Quadro P400 wins in specific niche areas. Its power draw of 30 W is 320 W lower than the RTX 3080 12 GB’s 350 W TDP, and it requires no auxiliary power connectors. Its single-slot, 150 mm length makes it compatible with compact or densely packed systems where the GeForce’s 285 mm dual-slot footprint will not fit. The Quadro P400 also offers three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, which can drive multiple displays in a professional setting, whereas the RTX 3080 12 GB provides one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. In terms of API support, both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the RTX 3080 12 GB supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro P400 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). The Quadro’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 5119 is its strongest recorded result, suggesting it handles lightweight compute and display tasks adequately.

Pairing this with the nearest rival data, the RTX 3080 12 GB’s closest competitor in the database is the AMD Radeon R5 M255 at 4788, a mere 0.1% behind, while the Quadro P400’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB at 4657, 0.6% behind. This indicates that despite the massive internal differences, both cards are ranked within the same low-to-mid-range tier by the database’s aggregate scoring methodology.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB is the superior card for any compute-intensive task. Its 30.64 TFLOPS FP32 output, 70 ray tracing cores, and 912.4 GB/s memory bandwidth place it in a different class from the Quadro P400. The GeForce card is the correct choice for users who run DX12 Ultimate workloads, require ray tracing support, or need to process large textures and datasets. Its 12 GB frame buffer and 384-bit bus are built for bandwidth-hungry applications, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 4791, while only slightly above the Quadro’s average, comes from a much more demanding test.

The Quadro P400 is the right pick only in constrained environments. Its 30 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and single-slot form factor make it ideal for embedded systems, low-profile workstations, or multi-GPU setups where space and power are at a premium. Its 2 GB memory and 32.06 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for basic display output, 2D workloads, or light 3D acceleration. The Quadro’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 4249 and Vulkan score of 5119 suggest it can handle modest compute tasks, but it cannot match the GeForce card in any parallel processing scenario.

Neither card is in production; both are end-of-life. The RTX 3080 12 GB launched on 2022-01-10 with a launch MSRP of 799 USD, while the Quadro P400 launched on 2017-02-06 with no recorded MSRP. For a user choosing between these two specific parts, the decision hinges on power and space constraints versus raw capability. The RTX 3080 12 GB is the only card that can meaningfully perform modern gaming, ray-traced rendering, or AI inference. The Quadro P400 is a display adapter with basic compute, not a performance part. The 28th versus 27th percentile ranking is misleading; the underlying architecture and specifications tell the real story.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB delivers 30.64 TFLOPS FP32, while the Quadro P400 manages 641.0 GFLOPS — a roughly 48x difference in favor of the GeForce card.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB uses 12 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus with 912.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 32.06 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the Quadro P400 support ray tracing?

A: No. The Quadro P400 has no ray tracing cores (listed as null), while the RTX 3080 12 GB has 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB has a 350 W TDP and needs a 750 W suggested PSU with a 1x 12-pin connector. The Quadro P400 has a 30 W TDP, no power connectors, and a 200 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card is physically smaller?

A: The Quadro P400 is a single-slot card measuring 150 mm by 69 mm. The RTX 3080 12 GB is dual-slot, measuring 285 mm by 112 mm by 40 mm.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB has an average score of 4791, and the Quadro P400 has an average score of 4684. The GeForce card’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M255 at 4788 (0.1% behind), while the Quadro’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB at 4657 (0.6% behind).