CPU
GPU
Quadro P6000
Popular choices:
Arc B580
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 P6000
Performance Per Dollar Arc B580
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc B580 is significantly newer (2024 vs 2016). The Arc B580 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro P6000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc B580 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro P6000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Xe2 Battlemage / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+95.3%) | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (272mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Arc B580 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $249 versus $1,500 for the Quadro P6000, it costs 83% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 520.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+520.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($1,500) | ✅More affordable ($249) |
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 P6000 and Arc B580
Quadro P6000
The Quadro P6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 1 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1506 MHz to 1645 MHz. It has 3840 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 15,512 points. Launch price was $5,999.
Arc B580
The Arc B580 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in December 13 2024. It features the Xe2 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2670 MHz to 2670 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 20 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 15,977 points. Launch price was $249.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P6000 scores 15,512 and the Arc B580 reaches 15,977 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P6000 is built on Pascal while the Arc B580 uses Xe2, both on 16 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 3,840 (Quadro P6000) vs 2,560 (Arc B580). Raw compute: 12.63 TFLOPS (Quadro P6000) vs 13.67 TFLOPS (Arc B580). Boost clocks: 1645 MHz vs 2670 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 15,512 | 15,977+3% |
| Architecture | Pascal | Xe2 |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 3840+50% | 2560 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 12.63 TFLOPS | 13.67 TFLOPS+8% |
| Boost Clock | 1645 MHz | 2670 MHz+62% |
| ROPs | 96+20% | 80 |
| TMUs | 240+50% | 160 |
| L1 Cache | 1.4 MB | 5 MB+257% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 18 MB+500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | XeSS |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro P6000 comes with 23 GB of VRAM, while the Arc B580 has 12 GB. The Quadro P6000 offers 95.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 432 GB/s (Quadro P6000) vs 456 GB/s (Arc B580) — a 5.6% advantage for the Arc B580. Bus width: 384-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Quadro P6000) vs 18 MB (Arc B580) — the Arc B580 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 23.438 GB+95% | 12 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 432 GB/s | 456 GB/s+6% |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+100% | 192-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 18 MB+500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro P6000) vs 12 Ultimate (Arc B580). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (2x) (Quadro P6000) vs Xe2 Media Engine (Arc B580). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP8 vs Xe2 Media Engine. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro P6000) vs AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC (Arc B580).
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5.0 (2x) | Xe2 Media Engine |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP8 | Xe2 Media Engine |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P6000 draws 250W versus the Arc B580's 190W — a 27.3% difference. The Arc B580 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (Quadro P6000) vs 600W (Arc B580). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 272mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 190W-24% |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 600W-8% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 272mm |
| Height | 111mm | 115mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 70°C-18% |
| Perf/Watt | 62.0 | 84.1+36% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P6000 launched at $5999 MSRP and currently averages $1500, while the Arc B580 launched at $249 and now averages $249. The Arc B580 costs 83.4% less ($1251 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 10.3 (Quadro P6000) vs 64.2 (Arc B580) — the Arc B580 offers 523.3% better value. The Arc B580 is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2016).
| Feature | Quadro P6000 | Arc B580 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $5999 | $249-96% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $1500 | $249-83% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.3 | 64.2+523% |
| Codename | GP102 | BMG-G21 |
| Release | October 1 2016 | December 13 2024 |
| Ranking | #141 | #132 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro P6000 and Arc B580
