CPU
GPU
Radeon Pro V520
Popular choices:
Quadro K6000
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. The Radeon Pro V520 is positioned at rank 139 and the Quadro K6000 is on rank 319, so the Radeon Pro V520 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro V520
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K6000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon Pro V520 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2013). The Radeon Pro V520 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro K6000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro V520 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K6000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+200%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (265mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon Pro V520 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $300 (vs $300), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 0.1% better value per dollar than the Quadro K6000.
| Insight | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+0.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 Radeon Pro V520 and Quadro K6000
Radeon Pro V520
The Radeon Pro V520 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1600 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,000 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro V520 scores 8,000 and the Quadro K6000 reaches 7,993 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro V520 is built on RDNA 1.0 while the Quadro K6000 uses Kepler, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (Radeon Pro V520) vs 2,880 (Quadro K6000). Raw compute: 7.373 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro V520) vs 5.196 TFLOPS (Quadro K6000). Boost clocks: 1600 MHz vs 902 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,000 | 7,993 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304 | 2880+25% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.373 TFLOPS+42% | 5.196 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1600 MHz+77% | 902 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 144 | 240+67% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+167% | 1.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon Pro V520 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K6000 has 12 GB. The Quadro K6000 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Radeon Pro V520) vs 1.5 MB (Quadro K6000) — the Radeon Pro V520 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 12 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+167% | 1.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Radeon Pro V520) vs 11.0 (Quadro K6000). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1+10% | 11.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 2.0 (Radeon Pro V520) vs NVENC 1.0 (Quadro K6000). Decoder: VCN 2.0 vs PureVideo HD VP5. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (Radeon Pro V520) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro K6000).
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 2.0 | NVENC 1.0 |
| Decoder | VCN 2.0 | PureVideo HD VP5 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro V520 draws 225W versus the Quadro K6000's 225W — a 0% difference. The Quadro K6000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro V520) vs 350W (Quadro K6000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 265mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 265mm |
| Height | 111mm | 110mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 80°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 35.6 | 35.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon Pro V520 launched at $800 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the Quadro K6000 launched at $5265 and now averages $300. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 26.7 (Radeon Pro V520) vs 26.6 (Quadro K6000) — the Radeon Pro V520 offers 0.4% better value. The Radeon Pro V520 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon Pro V520 | Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $800-85% | $5265 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 26.7 | 26.6 |
| Codename | Navi 12 | GK110B |
| Release | December 1 2020 | July 23 2013 |
| Ranking | #218 | #318 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon Pro V520 and Quadro K6000
