Quadro K6000 vs Radeon R9 290

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. The Quadro K6000 is positioned at rank #319 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro K6000

#303

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

9719%

#318

FirePro V8800

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $100

100%

#319

Quadro K6000

MSRP: $5265|Avg: $300

100%

#320

NVS 510

MSRP: $449|Avg: $15

99%

#321

GRID M60-1Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $50

97%

#322

GRID K280Q

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $50

93%

#323

FirePro M2000

MSRP: $300|Avg: $50

93%

#324

Tesla K20c

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $500

91%

#325

GRID M6-1Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $100

91%

#326

Quadro FX 380

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

90%

#327

Tesla C2050 / C2070

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $30

90%

#328

FirePro M7740

MSRP: $500|Avg: $500

88%

#329

Quadro FX 570

MSRP: $199|Avg: $15

86%

#330

RTXA5000-24Q

MSRP: $3721|Avg: $2100

85%

#331

GRID P40-1Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

84%

#333

Tesla M10

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $500

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 290 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% 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	Radeon R9 290
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+200%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	Standard Size (265mm)	Standard Size (275mm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon R9 290 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 290 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $300), it costs 83% less, resulting in a 514.3% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+514.3%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)	✅More affordable ($50)

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.

Quadro K6000 Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 290 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro K6000 and Radeon R9 290

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.

Radeon R9 290

The Radeon R9 290 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,184 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K6000 scores 7,993 and the Radeon R9 290 reaches 8,184 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K6000 is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 290 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,880 (Quadro K6000) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 290). Raw compute: 5.196 TFLOPS (Quadro K6000) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 290).

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
G3D Mark Score	7,993	8,184+2%
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	2880+13%	2560
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.196 TFLOPS+7%	4.849 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	64+33%
TMUs	240+50%	160
L1 Cache	240 KB	640 KB+167%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro K6000 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 290 has 4 GB. The Quadro K6000 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 211 GB/s (Quadro K6000) vs 320 GB/s (Radeon R9 290) — a 51.7% advantage for the Radeon R9 290. Bus width: 256-bit vs 512-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Quadro K6000) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 290) — the Quadro K6000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
VRAM Capacity	12 GB+200%	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	211 GB/s	320 GB/s+52%
Bus Width	256-bit	512-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.0 (Quadro K6000) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 290). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
DirectX	11.0	12.0+9%
Vulkan	1.1	1.2+9%
OpenGL	4.5	4.6+2%
Max Displays	4	6+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1.0 (Quadro K6000) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 290). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro K6000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon R9 290).

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
Encoder	NVENC 1.0	VCE 2.0
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP5	UVD 4.2
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K6000 draws 225W versus the Radeon R9 290's 275W — a 20% difference. The Quadro K6000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K6000) vs 750W (Radeon R9 290). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 265mm vs 275mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 95°C.

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290
TDP	225W-18%	275W
Recommended PSU	350W-53%	750W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	6-pin + 8-pin
Length	265mm	275mm
Height	110mm	109mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	80°C-16%	95°C
Perf/Watt	35.5+19%	29.8

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro K6000 launched at $5265 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the Radeon R9 290 launched at $399 and now averages $50. The Radeon R9 290 costs 83.3% less ($250 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 26.6 (Quadro K6000) vs 163.7 (Radeon R9 290) — the Radeon R9 290 offers 515.4% better value.