Quadro M6000 24GB vs GeForce GTX 1660
Quadro M6000 24GB
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1660
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M6000 24GB
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1660 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1660 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro M6000 24GB lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1660 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M6000 24GB offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1660 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $180 versus $600 for the Quadro M6000 24GB, it costs 70% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 233.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+233.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) | ✅More affordable ($180) |
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 M6000 24GB and GeForce GTX 1660
Quadro M6000 24GB
The Quadro M6000 24GB is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 5 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 988 MHz to 1114 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,625 points. Launch price was $4,999.
GeForce GTX 1660
The GeForce GTX 1660 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 14 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1530 MHz to 1785 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 120W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,639 points. Launch price was $219.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M6000 24GB scores 11,625 and the GeForce GTX 1660 reaches 11,639 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M6000 24GB is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1660 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 3,072 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 1,408 (GeForce GTX 1660). Raw compute: 6.844 TFLOPS (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 5.027 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1660). Boost clocks: 1114 MHz vs 1785 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 11,625 | 11,639 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 3072+118% | 1408 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.844 TFLOPS+36% | 5.027 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1114 MHz | 1785 MHz+60% |
| ROPs | 96+100% | 48 |
| TMUs | 256+191% | 88 |
| L1 Cache | 1.1 MB | 1.4 MB+27% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+100% | 1.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro M6000 24GB comes with 24 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1660 has 6 GB. The Quadro M6000 24GB offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 317 GB/s (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1660) — a 65.1% advantage for the Quadro M6000 24GB. Bus width: 384-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 1660) — the Quadro M6000 24GB has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 24 GB+300% | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 317 GB/s+65% | 192 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+100% | 192-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+100% | 1.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12/1 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1660). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12/1 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1660). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1660).
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4.0 | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M6000 24GB draws 250W versus the GeForce GTX 1660's 120W — a 70.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1660 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 450W (GeForce GTX 1660). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 120W-52% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 450W-10% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 229mm |
| Height | 112mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 46.5 | 97.0+109% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M6000 24GB launched at $4999 MSRP and currently averages $600, while the GeForce GTX 1660 launched at $219 and now averages $180. The GeForce GTX 1660 costs 70% less ($420 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 19.4 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 64.7 (GeForce GTX 1660) — the GeForce GTX 1660 offers 233.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1660 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2016).
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4999 | $219-96% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $600 | $180-70% |
| Performance per Dollar | 19.4 | 64.7+234% |
| Codename | GM200 | TU116 |
| Release | March 5 2016 | March 14 2019 |
| Ranking | #233 | #231 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro M6000 24GB and GeForce GTX 1660
