Quadro RTX 6000 vs FX 2500M
Aggregated performance score
RTX 6000 outperforms FX 2500M by 8600% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 1168 | 57 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | no data | 10.07 |
Architecture | G7x (2005−2007) | Turing (2018−2021) |
GPU code name | G71glm | TU102 |
Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
Release date | 29 September 2005 (18 years old) | 13 August 2018 (5 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $99.99 | $6,299 |
Current price | $126 (1.3x MSRP) | $3083 (0.5x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
FX 2500M and RTX 6000 have a nearly equal value for money.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 32 | 4608 |
Core clock speed | 8 MHz | 1440 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 500 MHz | 1770 MHz |
Number of transistors | 278 million | 18,600 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm | 12 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 260 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 12.00 | 509.8 |
Size and compatibility
Information on Quadro FX 2500M and Quadro RTX 6000 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
Laptop size | large | no data |
Interface | MXM-III | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 267 mm |
Width | no data | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Memory
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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 24 GB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1200 MHz | 14000 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 672.0 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | no data |
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 9.0c (9_3) | 12 Ultimate (12_1) |
Shader Model | 3.0 | 6.5 |
OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | N/A | 2.0 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
CUDA | no data | 7.5 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
RTX 6000 outperforms FX 2500M by 8600% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
RTX 6000 outperforms FX 2500M by 8597% in Passmark.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 8−9
−8025%
|
650−700
+8025%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−8400%
|
170−180
+8400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−8233%
|
500−550
+8233%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 8−9
−8025%
|
650−700
+8025%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
Metro Exodus | 1−2
−8400%
|
85−90
+8400%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−8400%
|
170−180
+8400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−8233%
|
500−550
+8233%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−8400%
|
170−180
+8400%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−8025%
|
650−700
+8025%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−7400%
|
300−310
+7400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8400%
|
85−90
+8400%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−8400%
|
85−90
+8400%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−8400%
|
85−90
+8400%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
−8400%
|
85−90
+8400%
|
Hitman 3 | 1−2
−8400%
|
85−90
+8400%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
−8471%
|
600−650
+8471%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−8567%
|
260−270
+8567%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
−7900%
|
400−450
+7900%
|
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 0.56 | 48.72 |
Recency | 29 September 2005 | 13 August 2018 |
Cost | $99.99 | $6299 |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 24 GB |
Chip lithography | 90 nm | 12 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 260 Watt |
The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2500M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 2500M is a mobile workstation card while Quadro RTX 6000 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.