
GeForce GTX 1060
Popular choices:

Quadro P2000
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
- ✅+44.5% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $176 less on MSRP ($249 MSRP vs $425 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 146.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 16.4 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $425 MSRP).
- ✅20% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 5 GB).
- ✅Measures 173mm instead of 201mm, a 28mm 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.
Quadro P2000
2017Why buy it
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (6,964 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 5 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 5 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌70.7% HIGHER MSRP$425 MSRPvs$249 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 16.4 vs 40.4 G3D/$ ($425 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Quadro P2000
2017Why buy it
- ✅+44.5% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $176 less on MSRP ($249 MSRP vs $425 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 146.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 16.4 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $425 MSRP).
- ✅20% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 5 GB).
- ✅Measures 173mm instead of 201mm, a 28mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.
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 (6,964 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 5 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 5 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌70.7% HIGHER MSRP$425 MSRPvs$249 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 16.4 vs 40.4 G3D/$ ($425 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1060 better than Quadro P2000?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Quadro P2000 make more sense than GeForce GTX 1060?
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 P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 117 FPS | 82 FPS |
| medium | 105 FPS | 70 FPS |
| high | 91 FPS | 59 FPS |
| ultra | 77 FPS | 39 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 72 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 76 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 67 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 55 FPS | 25 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 24 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 16 FPS |
| ultra | 37 FPS | 14 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 216 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 127 FPS |
| high | 148 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 62 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 134 FPS | 109 FPS |
| medium | 107 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 87 FPS | 65 FPS |
| ultra | 68 FPS | 45 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 53 FPS |
| medium | 51 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 49 FPS | 34 FPS |
| ultra | 41 FPS | 23 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 453 FPS | 307 FPS |
| medium | 362 FPS | 251 FPS |
| high | 302 FPS | 200 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 157 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 340 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 272 FPS | 188 FPS |
| high | 226 FPS | 157 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 118 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 226 FPS | 143 FPS |
| medium | 181 FPS | 125 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 85 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 54 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 358 FPS | 181 FPS |
| medium | 302 FPS | 149 FPS |
| high | 260 FPS | 132 FPS |
| ultra | 226 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 299 FPS | 125 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 104 FPS |
| high | 208 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 170 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 73 FPS |
| medium | 133 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 123 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 34 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1060 and Quadro P2000

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 P2000
Quadro P2000
The Quadro P2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 6 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1076 MHz to 1480 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,964 points. Launch price was $585.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1060 scores 10,064 versus the Quadro P2000's 6,964 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 44.5%. The GeForce GTX 1060 is built on Pascal while the Quadro P2000 uses Pascal, both on a 16 nm process. Shader units: 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 1,024 (Quadro P2000). Raw compute: 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 3.031 TFLOPS (Quadro P2000). Boost clocks: 1733 MHz vs 1480 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,064+45% | 6,964 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+150% | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.873 TFLOPS+193% | 3.031 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1733 MHz+17% | 1480 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+60% | 40 |
| TMUs | 160+150% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB+150% | 384 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+60% | 1.25 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 P2000 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 P2000 has 5 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 20% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 1.25 MB (Quadro P2000) — the GeForce GTX 1060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+20% | 5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 256-bit+33% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+60% | 1.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 12.0 (Quadro P2000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060) vs NVENC 6.0 (Quadro P2000). Decoder: NVDEC (Pascal) vs PureVideo HD VP8. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro P2000).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Pascal) | NVENC 6.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Pascal) | PureVideo HD VP8 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1060 draws 180W versus the Quadro P2000's 75W — a 82.4% difference. The Quadro P2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 350W (Quadro P2000). Power connectors: 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 173mm vs 201mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 180W | 75W-58% |
| Recommended PSU | 400W | 350W-13% |
| Power Connector | 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 173mm | 201mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Perf/Watt | 55.9 | 92.9+66% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 MSRP, while the Quadro P2000 launched at $425. The GeForce GTX 1060 costs 41.4% less ($176 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 40.4 (GeForce GTX 1060) vs 16.4 (Quadro P2000) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 146.3% better value. The Quadro P2000 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1060 | Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249-41% | $425 |
| Performance per Dollar | 40.4+146% | 16.4 |
| Codename | GP104 | GP106 |
| Release | May 27 2016 | February 6 2017 |
| Ranking | #137 | #346 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













