T1000 vs Quadro 6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 6000 and T1000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro 6000
2010
6 GB GDDR5, 204 Watt
6.36

T1000 outperforms 6000 by a whopping 184% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking614336
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Power efficiency2.4227.98
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF100TU117
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date10 December 2010 (14 years ago)6 May 2021 (4 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 cores448896
Core clock speed574 MHz1065 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1395 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate32.1478.12
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS2.5 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs5656
L1 Cache896 KB896 KB
L2 Cache768 KB1024 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length248 mm156 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed747 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth143.4 GB/s160.0 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-Video4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.07.5

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 6.36
T1000 18.05
+184%

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 2691
Samples: 260
T1000 7638
+184%
Samples: 723

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro 6000 9848
T1000 37744
+283%

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 HD18−21
−217%
57
+217%

Cost per frame, $

1080p244.39no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 57
+0%
57
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 77
+0%
77
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+0%
64
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35
+0%
35
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how Quadro 6000 and T1000 compete in popular games:

  • T1000 is 217% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.36 18.05
Recency 10 December 2010 6 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 204 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro 6000 has a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T1000, on the other hand, has a 183.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 308% lower power consumption.

The T1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 6000 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro 6000
Quadro 6000
NVIDIA T1000
T1000

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.


3.8 41 votes

Rate Quadro 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 73 votes

Rate T1000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 6000 or T1000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.