FirePro M6000 vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile and FirePro M6000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX 4000 Mobile
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
30.99
+609%

RTX 4000 Mobile outperforms M6000 by a whopping 609% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking204722
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.797.86
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameTU104Heathrow
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date27 May 2019 (7 years ago)1 July 2012 (14 years ago)

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 cores2560640
Core clock speed1110 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,600 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt43 Watt
Texture fill rate249.632.00
Floating-point processing power7.987 TFLOPS1.024 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs16040
Tensor Cores320no data
Ray Tracing Cores40no data
L1 Cache2.5 MB160 KB
L2 Cache4 MB256 KB

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).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno datan/a
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Form factorno dataMXM-B
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s72 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
G-SYNC support+-
StereoOutput3D-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RTX 4000 Mobile 30.99
+609%
FirePro M6000 4.37

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RTX 4000 Mobile 25371
+948%
FirePro M6000 2422

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RTX 4000 Mobile 56250
+424%
FirePro M6000 10744

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:

900p400−450
+590%
58
−590%
Full HD107
+155%
42
−155%
1440p63
+688%
8−9
−688%
4K47
+683%
6−7
−683%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+826%
18−20
−826%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+689%
9−10
−689%
Palworld 80−85
+636%
10−12
−636%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 80−85
+1233%
6−7
−1233%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 101
+461%
18−20
−461%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+826%
18−20
−826%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+689%
9−10
−689%
Far Cry 5 106
+715%
12−14
−715%
Fortnite 140−150
+450%
24−27
−450%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+481%
21−24
−481%
Palworld 80−85
+636%
10−12
−636%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+600%
18−20
−600%
Valorant 190−200
+244%
55−60
−244%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 87
+383%
18−20
−383%
Counter-Strike 2 170−180
+826%
18−20
−826%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+258%
75−80
−258%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+689%
9−10
−689%
Dota 2 132
+238%
35−40
−238%
Far Cry 5 100
+669%
12−14
−669%
Fortnite 140−150
+450%
24−27
−450%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+481%
21−24
−481%
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
+686%
14−16
−686%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+800%
8−9
−800%
Palworld 80−85
+636%
10−12
−636%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+600%
18−20
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 143
+1000%
12−14
−1000%
Valorant 190−200
+244%
55−60
−244%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 81
+350%
18−20
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+689%
9−10
−689%
Dota 2 127
+226%
35−40
−226%
Far Cry 5 96
+638%
12−14
−638%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+481%
21−24
−481%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+600%
18−20
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75
+477%
12−14
−477%
Valorant 190−200
+244%
55−60
−244%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150
+450%
24−27
−450%
Palworld 80−85
+636%
10−12
−636%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+825%
8−9
−825%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+547%
30−35
−547%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+1967%
3−4
−1967%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+1367%
3−4
−1367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+415%
30−35
−415%
Valorant 220−230
+428%
40−45
−428%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 66
+3200%
2−3
−3200%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Far Cry 5 69
+763%
8−9
−763%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+750%
10−11
−750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+817%
6−7
−817%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 80−85
+900%
8−9
−900%
Palworld 45−50
+650%
6−7
−650%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+750%
4−5
−750%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Palworld 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 0−1
Valorant 180−190
+884%
18−20
−884%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 42
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+750%
4−5
−750%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Dota 2 106
+607%
14−16
−607%
Far Cry 5 36
+1100%
3−4
−1100%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+850%
6−7
−850%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+640%
5−6
−640%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+660%
5−6
−660%
Palworld 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%

This is how RTX 4000 Mobile and FirePro M6000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 590% faster in 900p
  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 155% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 688% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 683% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 4000 Mobile is 4100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RTX 4000 Mobile surpassed FirePro M6000 in all 59 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.99 4.37
Recency 27 May 2019 1 July 2012
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 43 Watt

RTX 4000 Mobile has a 609% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133% more advanced lithography process.

FirePro M6000, on the other hand, has 156% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M6000 in performance tests.

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.


4.2 54 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 15 votes

Rate FirePro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile or FirePro M6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.