Radeon HD 7770M 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
7290 7330M 7350M 7370M 7400G 7410M 7420G 7430M 7450A 7450M 7470A 7470M 7490M 7500G 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics 7510M 7520G 7520G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics 7530M 7550M 7560G IGP 7570M 7590M 7600G 7610M 7620G 7630M 7640G 7640G + HD 7610M Dual Graphics 7640G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics 7650A 7650M 7650M Rebrand 7660G 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics 7670A 7670M 7670M Rebrand 7690M 7690M Rebrand 7690M XT 7690M XT Rebrand 7730M 7750M 7770M 7850M 7870M 7950M 7970M 7970M Crossfire 7970M X2

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 6000 with Radeon HD 7770M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 6000
2010, $4,399
6 GB GDDR5, 204 Watt
6.44
+104%

6000 outperforms HD 7770M by a whopping 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
HD 7770M HD 7770M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking620801
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Power efficiency2.437.60
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameGF100Chelsea
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date10 December 2010 (15 years ago)24 April 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 cores448512
Core clock speed574 MHz675 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Watt32 Watt
Texture fill rate32.1421.60
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs5632
L1 Cache896 KB128 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB1 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed747 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth143.4 GB/s64 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)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.0-

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 52 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 6.44 3.16
Recency 10 December 2010 24 April 2012
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 204 Watt 32 Watt

Quadro 6000 has a 104% higher aggregate performance score, and a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

HD 7770M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 43% more advanced lithography process, and 538% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7770M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 6000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 7770M 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 7770M Radeon HD 7770M
vs
GT 750M GeForce GT 750M
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
FirePro R5000 FirePro R5000
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000
vs
ATI 3000 IGP 3000 IGP
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000
vs
ATI 9800 PRO 128-bit 9800 PRO 128-bit
Quadro 600 Quadro 600
vs
HD Graphics 515 515
Quadro 600 Quadro 600
vs
R8 M350DX M350DX
Quadro 600 Quadro 600
vs
Pro W6800X Duo W6800X Duo
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
FX 3500M 3500M
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
ATI X550 XT X550 XT
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
9800 GT 9800 GT
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
9400M G 9400M G
Quadro 6000 Quadro 6000
vs
NVS 210S 210S

Community ratings

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

3.8 42 votes

Rate Quadro 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 8 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7770M 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 7770M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.