GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q vs Quadro K6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro K5200 Quadro K6000 Tesla K40d Tesla K40m Tesla K40s Tesla K40st Tesla K40t
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1660 Max-Q GTX 1660 Mobile GTX 1660 Ti Mobile GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GTX 1660 Ti Mobile Refresh

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K6000 with GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
18.02

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q outperforms K6000 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro K6000 Quadro K6000
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking280263
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.2869.53
Power efficiency6.3626.10
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGK110BTU116
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 $229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 5332% better value for money than Quadro K6000.

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 cores28801536
Core clock speed797 MHz1140 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz1335 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate216.5128.2
Floating-point processing power5.196 TFLOPS4.101 TFLOPS
ROPs4848
TMUs24096

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-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 amount12 GB6 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s288.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA3.57.5

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.

Quadro K6000 18.02
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 19.73
+9.5%

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 K6000 8052
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 8814
+9.5%

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 HD70−75
−12.9%
79
+12.9%
4K30−35
−10%
33
+10%

Cost per frame, $

1080p75.21
−2495%
2.90
+2495%
4K175.50
−2429%
6.94
+2429%
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 2495% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q has 2429% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Fortnite 92
+0%
92
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 78
+0%
78
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 94
+0%
94
+0%
Far Cry 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Fortnite 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 87
+0%
87
+0%
Metro Exodus 48
+0%
48
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 92
+0%
92
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 73
+0%
73
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Valorant 93
+0%
93
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 79
+0%
79
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how Quadro K6000 and GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 13% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is 10% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 18.02 19.73
Recency 23 July 2013 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 9.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro K6000 and GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q.

Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q is a notebook one.

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 K6000
Quadro K6000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro K6000 Quadro K6000
vs
Pro W6400 Radeon Pro W6400
GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
vs
RX 5600M Radeon RX 5600M
Quadro K6000 Quadro K6000
vs
Pro 5500 XT Radeon Pro 5500 XT
GRID K120Q GRID K120Q
vs
RTX A4500 Mobile RTX A4500 Mobile
Tesla K40m Tesla K40m
vs
RTX 2060 12 GB GeForce RTX 2060 12 GB
Tesla K40st Tesla K40st
vs
RTX 3060 8 GB GeForce RTX 3060 8 GB
Tesla K40c Tesla K40c
vs
K2200M Quadro K2200M
Tesla K40c Tesla K40c
vs
Apple M1 Max 32-Core GPU M1 Max 32-Core GPU
NVS 315 NVS 315
vs
HD Graphics P4700 HD Graphics P4700
Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000
vs
256 DDR GeForce 256 DDR
Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000
vs
256 SDR GeForce 256 SDR
Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000
vs
UHD Graphics 64EUs (Alder Lake 12th Gen) UHD Graphics 64EUs (Alder Lake 12th Gen)
Quadro K4000 Quadro K4000
vs
FirePro V4900 FirePro V4900

Community ratings

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

4 109 votes

Rate Quadro K6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 569 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K6000 or GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.