GeForce GTX 780 Ti vs Quadro K6000
Aggregated performance score
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 18% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 244 | 203 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 11.17 | 5.11 |
Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | GK110B | GK110 |
Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
Release date | 23 July 2013 (10 years ago) | 7 November 2013 (10 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $5,265 | $699 |
Current price | $429 (0.1x MSRP) | $461 (0.7x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Quadro K6000 has 119% better value for money than GTX 780 Ti.
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 | 2880 | 2880 |
CUDA cores | no data | 2880 |
Core clock speed | 797 MHz | 875 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 902 MHz | 928 MHz |
Number of transistors | 7,080 million | 7,080 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 250 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 216.5 | 210 billion/sec |
Floating-point performance | 5,196 gflops | 5,345 gflops |
Size and 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).
Bus support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 267 mm | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | One 8-pin and one 6-pin |
SLI options | no data | + |
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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
Memory bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 336 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 | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort |
Multi monitor support | no data | 4 displays |
HDMI | no data | + |
HDCP | no data | + |
Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Blu Ray 3D | no data | + |
3D Gaming | no data | + |
3D Vision | no data | + |
3D Vision Live | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_1) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | + | 1.1.126 |
CUDA | 3.5 | + |
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.
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 18% 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%
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 18% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 9%
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 23% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Benchmark coverage: 5%
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 4% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 4%
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 19% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 4%
GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Quadro K6000 by 18% in Octane Render OctaneBench.
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 HD | 80−85
−20%
| 96
+20%
|
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 20.81 | 24.57 |
Recency | 23 July 2013 | 7 November 2013 |
Cost | $5265 | $699 |
Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 3 GB |
Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 250 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 780 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K6000 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 780 Ti is a desktop 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.