
GRID M6-8Q vs Quadro 7000

GRID M6-8Q
Popular choices:

Quadro 7000
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GRID M6-8Q is positioned at rank 273 and the Quadro 7000 is on rank 398, so the GRID M6-8Q offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M6-8Q
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 7000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID M6-8Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro 7000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+200%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GRID M6-8Q offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GRID M6-8Q holds the technical lead. Priced at $100 (vs $300), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 205.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+205.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($100) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) |
Performance Check
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 7800X3D 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GRID M6-8Q and Quadro 7000

GRID M6-8Q
The GRID M6-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 722 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,568 points.

Quadro 7000
The Quadro 7000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 2 2012. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 651 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 204W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,505 points. Launch price was $14,499.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M6-8Q scores 3,568 and the Quadro 7000 reaches 3,505 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M6-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro 7000 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID M6-8Q) vs 512 (Quadro 7000). Raw compute: 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID M6-8Q) vs 1.3322 TFLOPS (Quadro 7000).
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,568+2% | 3,505 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+200% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.218 TFLOPS+66% | 1.3322 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 96+50% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 896 KB+56% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+167% | 0.75 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GRID M6-8Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro 7000 has 6 GB. The Quadro 7000 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M6-8Q) vs 0.75 MB (Quadro 7000) — the GRID M6-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 6 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+167% | 0.75 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M6-8Q draws 100W versus the Quadro 7000's 204W — a 68.4% difference. The GRID M6-8Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M6-8Q) vs 350W (Quadro 7000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-51% | 204W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 35.7+108% | 17.2 |
Value Analysis
The GRID M6-8Q launched at $1500 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the Quadro 7000 launched at $14499 and now averages $300. The GRID M6-8Q costs 66.7% less ($200 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 35.7 (GRID M6-8Q) vs 11.7 (Quadro 7000) — the GRID M6-8Q offers 205.1% better value. The GRID M6-8Q is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | Quadro 7000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1500-90% | $14499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $100-67% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 35.7+205% | 11.7 |
| Codename | GM204 | GF110 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | May 2 2012 |
| Ranking | #535 | #541 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











