Quadro K6000 vs Radeon R9 290 / 390

CPU

GPU

Quadro K6000

2013Core: 797 MHzBoost: 902 MHz

Similar parts

···

Buy on Amazon

Radeon R9 290 / 390

2015Boost: 1000 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Quadro K6000 vs Radeon R9 290 / 390 Performance Spectrum

Quadro K6000

12 GB 225

7,993

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

GeForce GTX 1050 Ti with Max-Q Design

GeForce MX570 A

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU

GeForce RTX 4060

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Laptop GPU

Radeon R9 290 / 390

4 GB 300

8,150

+2.0%

Radeon RX 560 (móvel)

Radeon 760M

Radeon R9 380X

Radeon RX 470 (móvel)

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.

Quadro K6000 vs Radeon R9 290 / 390 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro K6000 vs Radeon R9 290 / 390: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro K6000

2013

Why buy it

✅10.7% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Draws 225W instead of 300W, a 75W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 12 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌
1500.3% HIGHER MSRP
$5,265 MSRPvs$329 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.5 vs 24.8 G3D/$ ($5,265 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).

Radeon R9 290 / 390

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,936 less on MSRP ($329 MSRP vs $5,265 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1531.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 24.8 vs 1.5 G3D/$ ($329 MSRP vs $5,265 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro K6000 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 12 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2015 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌33.3% higher power demand at 300W vs 225W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro K6000 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 10.7% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Radeon R9 290 / 390 instead at 8,150 vs 7,993, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro K6000 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 12 GB vs 4 GB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R9 290 / 390 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $4,936 cheaper on MSRP at $329 vs $5,265, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 1531.7% (24.8 vs 1.5), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R9 290 / 390 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro K6000 has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro K6000 vs Radeon R9 290 / 390 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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 / 390

The Radeon R9 290 / 390 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 18 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,150 points. Launch price was $329.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K6000 scores 7,993 and the Radeon R9 290 / 390 reaches 8,150 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K6000 is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 290 / 390 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,880 (Quadro K6000) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 290 / 390). Raw compute: 5.196 TFLOPS (Quadro K6000) vs 5.12 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 290 / 390). Boost clocks: 902 MHz vs 1000 MHz.

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290 / 390
G3D Mark Score	7,993	8,150+2%
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	2880+13%	2560
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.196 TFLOPS+1%	5.12 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	902 MHz	1000 MHz+11%
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 / 390
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro K6000 has 12 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 290 / 390 carries 4 GB. Quadro K6000 gives you 200% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 211 GB/s (Quadro K6000) vs 320 GB/s (Radeon R9 290 / 390) — a 51.7% advantage for the Radeon R9 290 / 390. Memory bus width is 256-bit on the Quadro K6000 and 512-bit on the Radeon R9 290 / 390. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (Quadro K6000) vs 1 MB (Radeon R9 290 / 390) — the Quadro K6000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290 / 390
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 / 390). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290 / 390
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 / 390). 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 / 390).

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290 / 390
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 / 390's 300W — a 28.6% difference. The Quadro K6000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K6000) vs 750W (Radeon R9 290 / 390). 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 / 390
TDP	225W-25%	300W
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+31%	27.2

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Quadro K6000 came in at $5265, while the Radeon R9 290 / 390 launched at $329. On MSRP, Radeon R9 290 / 390 was 93.8% cheaper ($4936 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 1.5 (Quadro K6000) vs 24.8 (Radeon R9 290 / 390) — the Radeon R9 290 / 390 offers 1553.3% better value. The newer card here is Radeon R9 290 / 390 (2015 vs 2013).

Feature	Quadro K6000	Radeon R9 290 / 390
MSRP	$5265	$329-94%
Performance per Dollar	1.5	24.8+1553%
Codename	GK110B	Grenada
Release	July 23 2013	June 18 2015
Ranking	#318	#296

Search Quadro K6000 on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 290 / 390 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.