UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) vs Quadro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M6000 with UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake), including specs and performance data.

Quadro M6000
2015, $4,200
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
28.10
+123%

M6000 outperforms Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) by a whopping 123% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking231443
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.42no data
Power efficiency8.7064.93
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)no data
GPU code nameGM200Rocket Lake GT1
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date21 March 2015 (11 years ago)30 March 2021 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,199.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3072no data
Core clock speed988 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1114 MHzno data
Number of transistors8,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate213.9no data
Floating-point processing power6.844 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs192no data
L1 Cache1.1 MBno data
L2 Cache3 MBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount12 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1653 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth317.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA5.2-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD24−27
+100%
12
−100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p175.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Palworld 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 9
+0%
9
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Palworld 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
Metro Exodus 7
+0%
7
+0%
Palworld 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Palworld 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Palworld 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Palworld 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how Quadro M6000 and UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M6000 is 100% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.10 12.59
Recency 21 March 2015 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro M6000 has a 123% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1567% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M6000 is a workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.5 158 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 144 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M6000 or UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.