
RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell vs GeForce GTX 1060

RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1060
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 RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is significantly newer (2025 vs 2016). The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 1060 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 207.7% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (48 GB vs 6 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1060.
| Insight | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+207.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-207.7%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) / 5nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (48 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $60 versus $4,799 for the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, it costs 99% less. While it maintains significantly lower raw performance, this results in a 2499.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2499.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($4,799) | ✅More affordable ($60) |
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 RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell and GeForce GTX 1060

RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 18 2025. It features the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1740 MHz to 2377 MHz. It has 14080 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 110 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 30,968 points.

GeForce GTX 1060
The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell scores 30,968 versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 10,064 — the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell leads by 207.7%. The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is built on Blackwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1060 uses Pascal, both on 5 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 14,080 (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060). Raw compute: 66.94 TFLOPS (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060). Boost clocks: 2377 MHz vs 1733 MHz.
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 30,968+208% | 10,064 |
| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 14080+450% | 2560 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 66.94 TFLOPS+654% | 8.873 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2377 MHz+37% | 1733 MHz |
| ROPs | 176+175% | 64 |
| TMUs | 440+175% | 160 |
| L1 Cache | 13.8 MB+1368% | 0.94 MB |
| L2 Cache | 96 MB+4700% | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell comes with 48 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1060 has 6 GB. The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 1024 GB/s (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1060) — a 433.3% advantage for the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell. Bus width: 384-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 96 MB (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1060) — the RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 48 GB+700% | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR7 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 1024 GB/s+433% | 192 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+100% | 192-bit |
| L2 Cache | 96 MB+4700% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1060). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (9th Gen) (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060). Decoder: NVDEC (6th Gen) vs NVDEC (Pascal). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060).
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (9th Gen) | NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | NVDEC (6th Gen) | NVDEC (Pascal) |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell draws 300W versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 180W — a 50% difference. The GeForce GTX 1060 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 400W (GeForce GTX 1060). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 173mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 300W | 180W-40% |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 400W-38% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 173mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 103.2+85% | 55.9 |
Value Analysis
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell launched at $6999 MSRP and currently averages $4799, while the GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249 and now averages $60. The GeForce GTX 1060 costs 98.7% less ($4739 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.5 (RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell) vs 167.7 (GeForce GTX 1060) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 2480% better value. The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2016).
| Feature | RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $6999 | $249-96% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $4799 | $60-99% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.5 | 167.7+2480% |
| Codename | GB202 | GP104 |
| Release | March 18 2025 | May 27 2016 |
| Ranking | #13 | #137 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















