Quadro K6000 vs Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
Quadro K6000
Popular choices:
Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
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 Quadro K6000 is positioned at rank 319 and the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is on rank 150, so the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K6000
Performance Per Dollar Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is significantly newer (2019 vs 2013). The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro K6000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K6000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (265mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 Quadro K6000 and Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
Quadro K6000
The Quadro K6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 797 MHz to 902 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,993 points. Launch price was $5,265.
Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
The Quadro RTX 3000 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 600 MHz to 1215 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 60W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 36 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,119 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K6000 scores 7,993 and the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design reaches 8,119 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K6000 is built on Kepler while the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,880 (Quadro K6000) vs 2,304 (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 5.196 TFLOPS (Quadro K6000) vs 5.599 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 902 MHz vs 1215 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,993 | 8,119+2% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2880+25% | 2304 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.196 TFLOPS | 5.599 TFLOPS+8% |
| Boost Clock | 902 MHz | 1215 MHz+35% |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 240+67% | 144 |
| L1 Cache | 0.23 MB | 2.3 MB+900% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 4 MB+167% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro K6000 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design has 6 GB. The Quadro K6000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Quadro K6000) vs 4 MB (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design) — the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+100% | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 4 MB+167% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.0 (Quadro K6000) vs 12 Ultimate (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.0 | 12 Ultimate+9% |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1.0 (Quadro K6000) vs NVENC 7th Gen (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs NVDEC 4th Gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro K6000) vs H.265,H.264 (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design).
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1.0 | NVENC 7th Gen |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP5 | NVDEC 4th Gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | H.265,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K6000 draws 225W versus the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design's 60W — a 115.8% difference. The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K6000) vs 500W (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 265mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs Unknown.
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 60W-73% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 265mm | 0mm |
| Height | 110mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | Unknown-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 35.5 | 135.3+281% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro K6000 | Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $5265 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | — |
| Codename | GK110B | TU106 |
| Release | July 23 2013 | May 27 2019 |
| Ranking | #318 | #313 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K6000 and Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
