Quadro M6000 vs Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Quadro M6000
Popular choices:
Quadro RTX 4000 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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M6000
Performance Per Dollar Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro RTX 4000 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 M6000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M6000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Turing (2018−2022) / 12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro RTX 4000 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 M6000 and Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
Quadro M6000
The Quadro M6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 21 2015. 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: 11,769 points. Launch price was $4,199.99.
Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
The Quadro RTX 4000 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 780 MHz to 1380 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,173 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M6000 scores 11,769 and the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design reaches 12,173 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M6000 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 3,072 (Quadro M6000) vs 2,560 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 6.844 TFLOPS (Quadro M6000) vs 7.066 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1114 MHz vs 1380 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 11,769 | 12,173+3% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 3072+20% | 2560 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.844 TFLOPS | 7.066 TFLOPS+3% |
| Boost Clock | 1114 MHz | 1380 MHz+24% |
| ROPs | 96+50% | 64 |
| TMUs | 192+20% | 160 |
| L1 Cache | 1.1 MB | 2.5 MB+127% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 4 MB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Quadro M6000 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 3.5 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | DLSS 3.0 (Native) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | Yes (DLSS 3.5) |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro M6000 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design has 8 GB. The Quadro M6000 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 384-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Quadro M6000) vs 4 MB (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design) — the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+50% | 8 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+50% | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 4 MB+33% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12/1 (Quadro M6000) vs 12.2 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12/1 | 12.2+2% |
| 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) vs 7th Gen NVENC (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M6000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design).
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| 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 draws 250W versus the Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design's 80W — a 103% difference. The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Quadro M6000) vs 500W (Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 80W-68% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 0mm |
| Height | 112mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 47.1 | 152.2+223% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | Quadro M6000 | Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $4999 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | — |
| Codename | GM200 | TU104 |
| Release | March 21 2015 | May 27 2019 |
| Ranking | #228 | #220 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro M6000 and Quadro RTX 4000 with Max-Q Design
