GeForce GTX 680MX vs Quadro K6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K6000 with GeForce GTX 680MX, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
18.02
+124%

K6000 outperforms GTX 680MX by a whopping 124% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking275483
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.28no data
Power efficiency6.335.21
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK110Bno data
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)23 October 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

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 cores28801536
Core clock speed797 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,080 million3540 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt122 Watt
Texture fill rate216.592.2 billion/sec
Floating-point processing power5.196 TFLOPSno data
ROPs48no data
TMUs240no data

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 datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
SLI options-+

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 amount12 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s160 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 data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision-+
Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 API
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.5+

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
+124%
GTX 680MX 8.04

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
+124%
GTX 680MX 3593

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 K6000 24016
+96.4%
GTX 680MX 12225

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro K6000 17571
+55.4%
GTX 680MX 11307

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Quadro K6000 87
+142%
GTX 680MX 36

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 HD120−130
+118%
55
−118%

Cost per frame, $

1080p43.88no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how Quadro K6000 and GTX 680MX compete in popular games:

  • Quadro K6000 is 118% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.02 8.04
Recency 23 July 2013 23 October 2012
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 122 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 124.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 months, and a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 680MX, on the other hand, has 84.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680MX in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 680MX 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 680MX
GeForce GTX 680MX

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.


4 109 votes

Rate Quadro K6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 24 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K6000 or GeForce GTX 680MX, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.