Quadro M6000 24 GB vs Quadro K510M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K510M with Quadro M6000 24 GB, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K510M
2013
1 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
1.66

M6000 24 GB outperforms K510M by a whopping 1755% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking938176
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.78
Power efficiency3.838.53
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGK208GM200
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)5 March 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1923072
Core clock speed846 MHz988 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1114 MHz
Number of transistors915 million8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate13.54285.2
Floating-point processing power0.3249 TFLOPS6.844 TFLOPS
ROPs896
TMUs16256

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 amount1 GB24 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz1653 MHz
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/s317.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA+5.2

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

Quadro K510M 1.66
M6000 24 GB 30.79
+1755%

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 K510M 641
M6000 24 GB 11882
+1754%

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 Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−1733%
110−120
+1733%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
Hitman 3 6−7
−1733%
110−120
+1733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−1713%
290−300
+1713%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−1733%
55−60
+1733%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−1678%
160−170
+1678%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−1665%
600−650
+1665%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−1733%
110−120
+1733%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
Hitman 3 6−7
−1733%
110−120
+1733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−1713%
290−300
+1713%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−1733%
55−60
+1733%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−1678%
160−170
+1678%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−1733%
220−230
+1733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−1665%
600−650
+1665%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−1733%
110−120
+1733%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
Hitman 3 6−7
−1733%
110−120
+1733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−1713%
290−300
+1713%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−1678%
160−170
+1678%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−1733%
220−230
+1733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−1665%
600−650
+1665%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−1733%
55−60
+1733%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Hitman 3 7−8
−1614%
120−130
+1614%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−1700%
90−95
+1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
−1678%
160−170
+1678%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−1733%
55−60
+1733%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.66 30.79
Recency 23 July 2013 5 March 2016
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 24 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 250 Watt

Quadro K510M has 733.3% lower power consumption.

M6000 24 GB, on the other hand, has a 1754.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Quadro M6000 24 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K510M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K510M is a mobile workstation card while Quadro M6000 24 GB is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 K510M
Quadro K510M
NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB
Quadro M6000 24 GB

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.5 2 votes

Rate Quadro K510M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 16 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 24 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.