
GeForce GTX 1060
Popular choices:

Quadro M2000
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
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.
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Why buy it
- ✅+150% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro M2000: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro M2000 is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌140% higher power demand at 180W vs 75W.
Quadro M2000
2016Why buy it
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.
- ✅Measures 167mm instead of 173mm, a 6mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (4,026 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 40.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Quadro M2000
2016Why buy it
- ✅+150% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro M2000: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro M2000 is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.
- ✅Measures 167mm instead of 173mm, a 6mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌140% higher power demand at 180W vs 75W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (4,026 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 40.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1060 better than Quadro M2000?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Quadro M2000 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 117 FPS | 79 FPS |
| medium | 105 FPS | 68 FPS |
| high | 91 FPS | 55 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 36 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 60 FPS |
| high | 76 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 67 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 55 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 15 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 13 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 216 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 45 FPS |
| high | 148 FPS | 34 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 23 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 134 FPS | 37 FPS |
| medium | 107 FPS | 24 FPS |
| high | 87 FPS | 16 FPS |
| ultra | 68 FPS | 11 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 14 FPS |
| medium | 51 FPS | 9 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 7 FPS |
| ultra | 41 FPS | 5 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 453 FPS | 181 FPS |
| medium | 362 FPS | 145 FPS |
| high | 302 FPS | 121 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 340 FPS | 136 FPS |
| medium | 272 FPS | 109 FPS |
| high | 226 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 68 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 226 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 72 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 60 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 45 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 358 FPS | 177 FPS |
| medium | 302 FPS | 143 FPS |
| high | 260 FPS | 121 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 299 FPS | 123 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 102 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 68 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 32 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1060 and Quadro M2000

GeForce GTX 1060
GeForce GTX 1060
The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.

Quadro M2000
Quadro M2000
The Quadro M2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 8 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 796 MHz to 1163 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,026 points. Launch price was $437.75.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1060 scores 10,064 versus the Quadro M2000's 4,026 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 150%. The GeForce GTX 1060 is built on Pascal while the Quadro M2000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 16 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 768 (Quadro M2000). Raw compute: 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 1.786 TFLOPS (Quadro M2000). Boost clocks: 1733 MHz vs 1163 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,064+150% | 4,026 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+233% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.873 TFLOPS+397% | 1.786 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1733 MHz+49% | 1163 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 160+233% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB+233% | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1060 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro M2000 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1060 comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M2000 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 1 MB (Quadro M2000) — the GeForce GTX 1060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+200% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 12_1 (Quadro M2000). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12_1 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060) vs NVENC 2nd Gen (Quadro M2000). Decoder: NVDEC (Pascal) vs NVDEC 2nd Gen.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Pascal) | NVENC 2nd Gen |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Pascal) | NVDEC 2nd Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC | — |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1060 draws 180W versus the Quadro M2000's 75W — a 82.4% difference. The Quadro M2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 350W (Quadro M2000). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 173mm vs 167mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 180W | 75W-58% |
| Recommended PSU | 400W | 350W-13% |
| Power Connector | 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 173mm | 167mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Perf/Watt | 55.9+4% | 53.7 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 MSRP, while the Quadro M2000 launched at $0. The Quadro M2000 costs 100+% less ($249 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 40.4 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs Infinity (Quadro M2000) — the Quadro M2000 offers Infinity% better value.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249 | $0-100% |
| Performance per Dollar | 40.4 | Infinity |
| Codename | GP104 | GM206 |
| Release | May 27 2016 | April 8 2016 |
| Ranking | #137 | #491 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













