NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 vs NVIDIA TITAN Xp Comparison

The NVIDIA TITAN Xp and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 target different corners of the professional market, but the benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy. Across ten head-to-head tests, the TITAN Xp wins nine, while the Quadro RTX 4000 manages a single victory. The average benchmark score tells the same story: the TITAN Xp sits at 19,177 points, landing in the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro RTX 4000 averages 17,789 points, placing it in the 61st percentile. The TITAN Xp’s lead is not merely academic; it translates into decisive margins in compute-heavy and DirectX workloads, though the Quadro counters with a notable win in OpenCL and a substantial feature-set advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single victory for the TITAN Xp comes in the Passmark GPU Compute test, where it scores 9,430 against the Quadro’s 6,176. That is a 52.7% advantage, a massive gap that underscores the TITAN Xp’s raw compute throughput. This is the kind of result that matters for non-graphics workloads like rendering or simulation, where shader horsepower directly translates to reduced processing time.

DirectX 12 performance also heavily favors the TITAN Xp. In the Passmark DirectX 12 test, the TITAN Xp scores 69 versus 52, a 32.7% lead. Similarly, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark shows the TITAN Xp at 2,372 points against the Quadro’s 1,873, a 26.6% advantage. These results indicate that for modern gaming APIs and DX12-based professional applications, the older Pascal architecture in the TITAN Xp retains a significant performance edge over the Turing-based Quadro.

The Passmark G3D test, often used as a general gaming and graphics proxy, shows the TITAN Xp scoring 18,750 versus 15,117 for the Quadro, a 24% difference. The margin narrows in DirectX 11, where the TITAN Xp leads 152 to 128 (18.8%), and in both DirectX 10 and DirectX 9, the TITAN Xp holds a consistent 10.2% advantage, scoring 119 vs 108 and 226 vs 205 respectively. Even in the 2D test, the TITAN Xp edges ahead, 883 to 846, a 4.4% difference.

The Vulkan results favor the TITAN Xp as well, with a score of 87,180 against the Quadro’s 78,844, a 10.6% lead. The only benchmark where the Quadro RTX 4000 comes out ahead is Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 74,540 versus the TITAN Xp’s 72,585, a modest 2.6% margin. This single win suggests that in certain OpenCL-optimized workloads, the Quadro’s newer architecture can close the gap, but it does not overturn the overall trend of TITAN Xp dominance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The TITAN Xp uses the GP102 chip based on the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro RTX 4000 uses the TU104 chip based on the Turing architecture, also from TSMC but on a smaller 12 nm process node. The transistor counts reflect this generational shift: the TITAN Xp packs 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, while the Quadro RTX 4000 contains 13,600 million transistors on a larger 545 mm² die. Interestingly, the transistor density is nearly identical, with the TITAN Xp at 25.1M transistors per mm² and the Quadro at 25.0M per mm².

The core configurations diverge sharply. The TITAN Xp features 3,840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The Quadro RTX 4000 has fewer of each: 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This explains the TITAN Xp’s higher pixel rate of 151.9 GPixel/s versus the Quadro’s 98.88 GPixel/s, as well as its superior texture rate of 379.7 GTexel/s versus 222.5 GTexel/s.

Memory is another major differentiator. The TITAN Xp uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 547.6 GB/s. The Quadro RTX 4000 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 416.0 GB/s. The TITAN Xp’s memory clock runs at an effective 11.4 Gbps, while the Quadro’s runs faster at an effective 13 Gbps, but the wider bus on the TITAN Xp more than compensates, giving it a 31.6% bandwidth advantage.

The most significant architectural addition on the Quadro RTX 4000 is the inclusion of dedicated hardware: 36 RT cores for ray tracing and 288 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The TITAN Xp has none of these. This is a critical feature gap, as the Quadro supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the TITAN Xp only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the Quadro’s RT and tensor cores enable workloads that the TITAN Xp cannot accelerate at all.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN Xp is the clear winner in raw, unaccelerated compute and traditional graphics. Its 52.7% lead in Passmark GPU Compute, 32.7% lead in DirectX 12, and 24% lead in G3D make it the superior choice for users whose primary workloads are gaming, general 3D rendering, or compute tasks that rely on standard FP32 shader performance. The FP32 throughput difference is stark: the TITAN Xp delivers 12.15 TFLOPS while the Quadro RTX 4000 delivers 7.119 TFLOPS. This nearly 71% advantage in raw floating-point performance is why the TITAN Xp dominates in most benchmarks.

The Quadro RTX 4000 wins in specific scenarios where its Turing architecture shines. Its only benchmark victory is in Geekbench OpenCL, where it leads by 2.6%. More importantly, the Quadro’s FP16 performance is dramatically better. The TITAN Xp offers only 189.8 GFLOPS of FP16, a 1:64 ratio compared to its FP32, while the Quadro RTX 4000 delivers 14.24 TFLOPS of FP16, a 2:1 ratio. For workloads that can leverage FP16, such as certain AI inference or image processing tasks, the Quadro is vastly more capable. Additionally, the 288 tensor cores and 36 RT cores provide dedicated acceleration for ray tracing and deep learning that the TITAN Xp simply cannot offer, even if its raw FP32 numbers are lower.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in DirectX 12 gaming benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN Xp is significantly faster. In the Passmark DirectX 12 test, it scores 69 versus the Quadro RTX 4000’s 52, a 32.7% advantage. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it leads with 2,372 points against the Quadro’s 1,873, a 26.6% margin.

Q: Does the Quadro RTX 4000 have any ray tracing or AI hardware?

A: Yes. The Quadro RTX 4000 is equipped with 36 RT cores for ray tracing and 288 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The TITAN Xp has no such dedicated hardware.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The TITAN Xp has significantly more bandwidth. It features a 384-bit bus with GDDR5X memory, delivering 547.6 GB/s. The Quadro RTX 4000 has a 256-bit bus with GDDR6, delivering 416.0 GB/s. This gives the TITAN Xp a 31.6% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Is the TITAN Xp better at compute tasks?

A: Based on the data, yes. The TITAN Xp scores 9,430 in Passmark GPU Compute, which is 52.7% higher than the Quadro RTX 4000’s 6,176. Its FP32 throughput is 12.15 TFLOPS compared to the Quadro’s 7.119 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the difference in FP16 performance?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 is vastly superior in FP16. It delivers 14.24 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the TITAN Xp delivers only 189.8 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio. This makes the Quadro much better for FP16-optimized workloads.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The TITAN Xp has a higher average benchmark score of 19,177 points, placing it in the 64th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro RTX 4000 averages 17,789 points, placing it in the 61st percentile.

Specification Differences

The most glaring differences are in core counts and memory configuration. The TITAN Xp has 3,840 shading units versus the Quadro’s 2,304. It also has more TMUs (240 vs 144) and ROPs (96 vs 64). Memory size differs with the TITAN Xp offering 12 GB and the Quadro 8 GB, and the bus width differs at 384-bit versus 256-bit. The memory type is also different, with the TITAN Xp using GDDR5X and the Quadro using GDDR6.

Clock speeds are lower on the Quadro, with a base clock of 1005 MHz versus 1405 MHz on the TITAN Xp, though the boost clocks are closer at 1545 MHz versus 1582 MHz. The TITAN Xp has a higher TDP of 250 W compared to the Quadro’s 160 W. This translates to power connector requirements: the TITAN Xp needs a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector with a 600 W suggested PSU, while the Quadro only needs a single 8-pin with a 450 W suggested PSU.

Physical dimensions differ as well. The TITAN Xp is longer at 267 mm (10.5 inches) and wider at 40 mm (1.6 inches), making it a dual-slot card. The Quadro RTX 4000 is shorter at 241 mm (9.5 inches) and is a single-slot card. Display outputs also differ: the TITAN Xp offers 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro offers 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. The TITAN Xp uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process, while the Quadro uses Turing on a 12 nm process. The release dates are also distinct, with the TITAN Xp launching on April 5, 2017, and the Quadro on November 12, 2018.

The Verdict

The data makes a straightforward recommendation for pure performance. The NVIDIA TITAN Xp is the faster card in nearly every benchmark, with decisive leads in compute (52.7%), DirectX 12 (32.7%), and overall 3D performance (24%). Its higher FP32 throughput of 12.15 TFLOPS versus 7.119 TFLOPS and larger memory bandwidth of 547.6 GB/s versus 416.0 GB/s make it the clear choice for users who need maximum raw rasterization and compute power. Its 12 GB of VRAM also provides more headroom for large textures or datasets.

However, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 should be the pick for users who need modern features. Its 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores enable ray tracing and AI acceleration that the TITAN Xp cannot provide. Its FP16 performance is 14.24 TFLOPS, a massive improvement over the TITAN Xp’s 189.8 GFLOPS, making it essential for workloads that utilize mixed-precision computing. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the TITAN Xp is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). The Quadro’s lower TDP of 160 W and single-slot design also make it easier to integrate into dense workstation builds, though its 8 GB of VRAM is a limitation compared to the TITAN Xp’s 12 GB. In short, the TITAN Xp wins on raw speed, but the Quadro wins on architectural capability.