Radeon HD 7610M vs Quadro 6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
4000 4000 Mac Edition 5000 5000 SDI 6000 6000 SDI Tesla C2050 Tesla C2070 Tesla M2050 Tesla M2070 Tesla M2070-Q Tesla S2050
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6610M 6625M 6630M 6630M Mac Edition 6650M 6730M 6750M 6770M 6770M Mac Edition 7610M 7650M Rebrand 7670M Rebrand

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 6000 with Radeon HD 7610M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 6000
2010, $4,399
6 GB GDDR5, 204 Watt
6.44
+326%

6000 outperforms HD 7610M by a whopping 326% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
HD 7610M HD 7610M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6201019
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Power efficiency2.435.81
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGF100Whistler
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date10 December 2010 (15 years ago)7 January 2012 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,399 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

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores448400
Core clock speed574 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate32.149.000
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS0.36 TFLOPS
ROPs488
TMUs5620
L1 Cache896 KB40 KB
L2 Cache768 KB256 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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB1 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed747 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth143.4 GB/s25.6 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.0-

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.

Quadro 6000 6.44
+326%
HD 7610M 1.51

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Quadro 6000 2695
+326%
Samples: 262
HD 7610M 632
Samples: 79

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 HD55−60
+293%
14
−293%

Cost per frame, $

1080p79.98no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 38
+0%
38
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Quadro 6000 and HD 7610M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 6000 is 293% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 46 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 6.44 1.51
Recency 10 December 2010 7 January 2012
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 204 Watt 20 Watt

Quadro 6000 has a 326% higher aggregate performance score, and a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD 7610M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 920% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7610M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 6000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 7610M 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.

Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
Quadro K4000 Quadro K4000
HD 7610M Radeon HD 7610M
vs
GTS 360M GeForce GTS 360M
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
FirePro R5000 FirePro R5000
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000
vs
GT 710M 710M
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000
vs
RTX 3060 Ti 3060 Ti
Quadro 600 Quadro 600
vs
GeForce 6600 6600
Quadro 600 Quadro 600
vs
6600 GT 6600 GT
Quadro 600 Quadro 600
vs
Iris Plus Graphics 930 930
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
HD 8210 8210
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
ATI Mobility HD 3850 X2 3850 X2
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
9700M GT 9700M GT
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
GT 120M 120M
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
9500M GS 9500M GS

Community ratings

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

3.8 41 votes

Rate Quadro 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 39 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 6000 or Radeon HD 7610M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.