NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Comparison

# NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 represent two distinct approaches to high-end GPU design, with the former built for professional workstation longevity and the latter optimized for raw consumer performance. Benchmark data shows the RTX 3090 wins 8 of 9 head-to-head tests, yet the Quadro RTX 8000 delivers a decisive victory in Vulkan workloads and offers double the memory capacity. The RTX 3090's average benchmark score of 27,565 places it at the 73rd percentile, while the Quadro RTX 8000's 28,421 average sits at the 74th percentile, indicating near-identical overall standing despite their architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory, and what is the difference?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 features 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, double the 24 GB of GDDR6X found on the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090. Both use a 384-bit memory bus, but the RTX 3090 achieves higher bandwidth at 936.2 GB/s versus 672.0 GB/s.

Q: How do the two compare in compute performance?

A: The RTX 3090 delivers 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance, more than double the Quadro RTX 8000's 16.31 TFLOPS. In PassMark GPU Compute tests, the RTX 3090 scores 15,356 compared to 9,992 for the Quadro, a 34.9% advantage.

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 dominates in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 122,637 versus the RTX 3090's 53,927. This represents a 127.4% advantage for the Quadro, making it the only benchmark where the professional card wins.

Q: What are the manufacturing process differences?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 uses a 12 nm process at TSMC with 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die. The RTX 3090 uses Samsung's 8 nm process with 28,300 million transistors on a smaller 628 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 45.1M per mm² versus 24.7M per mm².

Q: What is the launch MSRP of each card?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 launched with an MSRP of 9,999 USD, while the RTX 3090 launched at 1,499 USD.

Q: Which GPU has better DirectX 12 performance?

A: The RTX 3090 scores 110 in PassMark DirectX 12 tests versus 79 for the Quadro RTX 8000, a 28.2% difference favoring the consumer card. The RTX 3090 also wins in DirectX 9, 10, and 11 tests.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro RTX 8000 is built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture using the TU102 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 12 nm process. The RTX 3090 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. This process jump allows the RTX 3090 to pack 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, whereas the Quadro RTX 8000 fits 18,600 million transistors into a larger 754 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: 45.1M per mm² for Ampere versus 24.7M per mm² for Turing.

The RTX 3090's core configuration dramatically exceeds the Quadro's. It features 10,496 shading units, 328 texture mapping units, and 112 ROPs, compared to 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, and 96 ROPs on the Quadro. Ray tracing cores also favor the RTX 3090 with 82 cores versus 72, while tensor cores tell a different story: the Quadro RTX 8000 has 576 tensor cores, but the RTX 3090 has 328. The FP16 processing approach differs fundamentally, with the Quadro using a 2:1 ratio achieving 32.62 TFLOPS, while the RTX 3090 operates at 1:1 delivering 35.58 TFLOPS.

Memory architecture shows a trade-off between capacity and speed. The Quadro RTX 8000 offers 48 GB of GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective, while the RTX 3090 has 24 GB of GDDR6X at 19.5 Gbps effective. Both use 384-bit buses, but the faster GDDR6X memory gives the RTX 3090 a 936.2 GB/s bandwidth advantage over the Quadro's 672.0 GB/s. The RTX 3090 also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the interface bandwidth of the Quadro's PCIe 3.0 x16 connection. Display outputs differ as well: the Quadro offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus USB Type-C, while the RTX 3090 provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RTX 3090 establishes dominance across most tests, starting with Geekbench OpenCL where it scores 172,758 against the Quadro RTX 8000's 101,883, a 41% advantage. This gap reflects the RTX 3090's higher shading unit count and FP32 throughput. PassMark DirectX tests all favor the RTX 3090: DirectX 10 shows 182 versus 137 (24.7% difference), DirectX 11 shows 220 versus 188 (14.5%), DirectX 12 shows 110 versus 79 (28.2%), and DirectX 9 shows 268 versus 211 (21.3%). The 2D graphics test also goes to the RTX 3090 with 1,063 points versus 866, an 18.5% margin.

The largest win for the RTX 3090 comes in PassMark G3D, where it scores 26,645 against 19,799, a 25.7% difference. PassMark GPU Compute shows similar dominance: 15,356 versus 9,992, a 34.9% gap that highlights the RTX 3090's compute superiority. The only benchmark victory for the Quadro RTX 8000 is Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 122,637 versus 53,927 — a massive 127.4% delta, suggesting that Turing's Vulkan implementation is significantly more efficient in this specific workload.

The overall wins tally is 8 for the RTX 3090 and 1 for the Quadro RTX 8000. Despite this, the average benchmark scores are remarkably close: 28,421 for the Quadro versus 27,565 for the RTX 3090, with the Quadro actually holding a slight edge of roughly 3% in average score. This paradox stems from the Vulkan outlier, where the Quadro's enormous margin offsets numerous smaller RTX 3090 victories. The percentile rankings confirm this near-parity, with the Quadro at the 74th percentile and the RTX 3090 at the 73rd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge across nearly every specification category. Manufacturing: the Quadro uses TSMC's 12 nm process, while the RTX 3090 uses Samsung's 8 nm. Transistors: 18,600 million versus 28,300 million. Die size: 754 mm² versus 628 mm². Memory size: 48 GB GDDR6 versus 24 GB GDDR6X. Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective). Bandwidth: 672.0 GB/s versus 936.2 GB/s.

Core counts differ substantially: shading units 4,608 versus 10,496, TMUs 288 versus 328, ROPs 96 versus 112. Ray tracing cores: 72 versus 82. Tensor cores: 576 versus 328. FP32 performance: 16.31 TFLOPS versus 35.58 TFLOPS. FP16 performance: 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 35.58 TFLOPS (1:1). Pixel rate: 169.9 GPixel/s versus 189.8 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 509.8 GTexel/s versus 556.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical specs also differ: TDP is 260 W for the Quadro versus 350 W for the RTX 3090, with power connectors of 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin versus 1x 12-pin. The suggested PSU is 600 W versus 750 W. The Quadro is a dual-slot card at 267 mm length and 111 mm height, while the RTX 3090 is triple-slot at 336 mm length, 140 mm height, and 61 mm width. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Release dates: August 2018 for the Quadro, August 2020 for the RTX 3090. Launch MSRP: 9,999 USD versus 1,499 USD.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two GPUs by use case rather than raw capability. For users prioritizing compute throughput, DirectX performance, and memory bandwidth, the RTX 3090 is the definitive choice — it wins 8 of 9 head-to-head benchmarks, offers more than double the FP32 performance, and delivers 39% higher memory bandwidth. Its 82 ray tracing cores and 10,496 shading units make it better suited for rendering workloads that leverage these resources.

The Quadro RTX 8000's case rests on two pillars: memory capacity and Vulkan performance. The 48 GB VRAM doubles the RTX 3090's 24 GB, which matters for datasets that exceed 24 GB. The 127.4% Vulkan advantage suggests the Turing architecture handles certain graphics APIs more efficiently. However, benchmark results indicate this Vulkan strength is an outlier rather than a pattern, as the RTX 3090 wins every other test.

The average benchmark scores — 28,421 for the Quadro versus 27,565 for the RTX 3090 — show that the professional card holds a narrow overall edge despite losing most individual tests. This is a statistical curiosity driven by the Vulkan margin. The RTX 3090's lower launch MSRP of 1,499 USD versus 9,999 USD for the Quadro makes it the rational choice for most buyers, but the Quadro's 48 GB capacity and Vulkan dominance give it a distinct niche for specific professional workloads. Users needing maximum VRAM or Vulkan-specific performance should consider the Quadro; everyone else should favor the RTX 3090 based on the benchmark evidence.