Quadro M6000 24GB vs Radeon Pro 5700
Quadro M6000 24GB
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro 5700
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 Radeon Pro 5700
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon Pro 5700 uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon Pro 5700 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 Quadro M6000 24GB is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.4% higher G3D Mark score and 200% more VRAM (24 GB vs 8 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon Pro 5700.
| Insight | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🔮Strong Longevity (RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) / 7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+200%) | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon Pro 5700 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $250 versus $600 for the Quadro M6000 24GB, it costs 58% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 136.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+136.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($600) | ✅More affordable ($250) |
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 Radeon Pro 5700
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.
Radeon Pro 5700
The Radeon Pro 5700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 4 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1243 MHz to 1350 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,469 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M6000 24GB scores 11,625 and the Radeon Pro 5700 reaches 11,469 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M6000 24GB is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon Pro 5700 uses RDNA 1.0, both on 28 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 3,072 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 2,304 (Radeon Pro 5700). Raw compute: 6.844 TFLOPS (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 6.221 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 5700). Boost clocks: 1114 MHz vs 1350 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 11,625+1% | 11,469 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 3072+33% | 2304 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.844 TFLOPS+10% | 6.221 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1114 MHz | 1350 MHz+21% |
| ROPs | 96+50% | 64 |
| TMUs | 256+78% | 144 |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 4 MB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M6000 24GB comes with 24 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 5700 has 8 GB. The Quadro M6000 24GB offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 4 MB (Radeon Pro 5700) — the Radeon Pro 5700 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 24 GB+200% | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+200% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 4 MB+33% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12/1 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro 5700). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12/1 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.4+27% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 6+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs VCN 2.0 (Radeon Pro 5700). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs VCN 2.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs H.264,H.265 (Radeon Pro 5700).
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4.0 | VCN 2.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | VCN 2.0 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | H.264,H.265 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M6000 24GB draws 250W versus the Radeon Pro 5700's 130W — a 63.2% difference. The Radeon Pro 5700 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 500W (Radeon Pro 5700). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 130W-48% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 267mm |
| Height | 112mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 46.5 | 88.2+90% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro M6000 24GB launched at $4999 MSRP and currently averages $600, while the Radeon Pro 5700 launched at $799 and now averages $250. The Radeon Pro 5700 costs 58.3% less ($350 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 19.4 (Quadro M6000 24GB) vs 45.9 (Radeon Pro 5700) — the Radeon Pro 5700 offers 136.6% better value. The Radeon Pro 5700 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2016).
| Feature | Quadro M6000 24GB | Radeon Pro 5700 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4999 | $799-84% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $600 | $250-58% |
| Performance per Dollar | 19.4 | 45.9+137% |
| Codename | GM200 | Navi 10 |
| Release | March 5 2016 | August 4 2020 |
| Ranking | #233 | #238 |
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 Radeon Pro 5700
