G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design

2019

Why buy it

✅28.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs Unknown).
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 80W instead of 210W, a 130W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 30.3 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $399 MSRP).

Radeon Pro Vega 56

2017

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 30.3 vs 0 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌162.5% higher power demand at 210W vs 80W.

Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design

2019

Radeon Pro Vega 56

2017

Why buy it

✅28.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs Unknown).
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 80W instead of 210W, a 130W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 30.3 vs 0 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 30.3 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $399 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌162.5% higher power demand at 210W vs 80W.

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design better than Radeon Pro Vega 56?

Yes. Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is clearly the better overall GPU here. Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design averages 28.0% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 12,173 vs 12,104 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is a 2019 card with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation, while Radeon Pro Vega 56 is a 2017 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2019 generation instead of 2017, more VRAM at 8 GB instead of Unknown, better frame-generation support with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023) instead of FSR upscaling, and a 12nm process instead of 14nm. That extra memory headroom makes it the safer pick for newer games, heavier textures, and higher settings over time.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is the smarter buy by a wide margin. Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $399 MSRP, and you are getting 28.0% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 0.6% higher G3D Mark. Radeon Pro Vega 56 really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.

Is Radeon Pro Vega 56 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

No, not for a fresh gaming build. Radeon Pro Vega 56 is 2017 hardware with Unknown of VRAM, 12,104 in G3D Mark, and FSR upscaling. That is simply too far behind to be an easy modern recommendation.

Games Benchmarks

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro Vega 56 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
1080p
low	127 FPS	95 FPS
medium	109 FPS	82 FPS
high	91 FPS	70 FPS
ultra	62 FPS	48 FPS
1440p
low	103 FPS	79 FPS
medium	85 FPS	68 FPS
high	65 FPS	53 FPS
ultra	45 FPS	36 FPS
4K
low	45 FPS	31 FPS
medium	39 FPS	28 FPS
high	28 FPS	22 FPS
ultra	23 FPS	19 FPS

Open Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro Vega 56

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
1080p
low	174 FPS	267 FPS
medium	139 FPS	227 FPS
high	117 FPS	178 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	134 FPS	189 FPS
medium	105 FPS	162 FPS
high	90 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	74 FPS	105 FPS
4K
low	78 FPS	100 FPS
medium	63 FPS	83 FPS
high	53 FPS	71 FPS
ultra	40 FPS	55 FPS

Open Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro Vega 56

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
1080p
low	548 FPS	485 FPS
medium	438 FPS	417 FPS
high	365 FPS	363 FPS
ultra	274 FPS	272 FPS
1440p
low	411 FPS	386 FPS
medium	329 FPS	327 FPS
high	274 FPS	272 FPS
ultra	205 FPS	204 FPS
4K
low	274 FPS	245 FPS
medium	219 FPS	202 FPS
high	183 FPS	160 FPS
ultra	137 FPS	123 FPS

Open Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro Vega 56

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
1080p
low	247 FPS	176 FPS
medium	214 FPS	144 FPS
high	172 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	145 FPS	104 FPS
1440p
low	189 FPS	127 FPS
medium	167 FPS	107 FPS
high	131 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	108 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	112 FPS	73 FPS
medium	94 FPS	61 FPS
high	76 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	37 FPS

Open Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro Vega 56

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design and Radeon Pro Vega 56

Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design

The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 780 MHz to 1380 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,173 points.

Radeon Pro Vega 56

The Radeon Pro Vega 56 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 14 2017. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1138 MHz to 1250 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 210W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,104 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design scores 12,173 and the Radeon Pro Vega 56 reaches 12,104 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses GCN 5.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 3,584 (Radeon Pro Vega 56). Raw compute: 7.066 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 8.96 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro Vega 56). Boost clocks: 1380 MHz vs 1250 MHz.

Feature	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
G3D Mark Score	12,173	12,104
Architecture	Turing	GCN 5.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	2560	3584+40%
Compute (TFLOPS)	7.066 TFLOPS	8.96 TFLOPS+27%
Boost Clock	1380 MHz+10%	1250 MHz
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	160	224+40%
L1 Cache	2.5 MB+184%	0.88 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB	4 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

A critical advantage for the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is support for DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Radeon Pro Vega 56 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro Vega 56 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
Upscaling Tech	DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	Yes (DLSS 3.5)	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 0 MB. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
VRAM Capacity	8 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	256-bit+100%	128-bit
L2 Cache	4 MB	4 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.2 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro Vega 56). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
DirectX	12.2	12.1
Vulkan	1.3+18%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 4.0 (Radeon Pro Vega 56). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs UVD 7.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon Pro Vega 56).

Feature	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
Encoder	7th Gen NVENC	VCE 4.0
Decoder	5th Gen NVDEC	UVD 7.0
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design draws 80W versus the Radeon Pro Vega 56's 210W — a 89.7% difference. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) vs 1W (Radeon Pro Vega 56). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Integrated. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 85°C.

Feature	Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro Vega 56
TDP	80W-62%	210W
Recommended PSU	500W	1W-100%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Integrated
Length	0mm	267mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	80°C-6%	85°C
Perf/Watt	152.2+164%	57.6