Quadro M1000M vs K6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
20.85
+181%

K6000 outperforms M1000M by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking245501
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.920.88
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGK110BGM107
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date23 July 2013 (10 years ago)2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 $200.89
Current price$429 (0.1x MSRP)$706 (3.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K6000 has 1255% better value for money than M1000M.

Detailed specifications

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 cores2880512
Core clock speed797 MHz993 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz1072 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate216.531.78
Floating-point performance5,196 gflops1,017 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro K6000 and Quadro M1000M 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB2 GB/4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed6008 MHz5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimusno data+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA3.55.0

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.

Quadro K6000 20.85
+181%
M1000M 7.43

K6000 outperforms M1000M by 181% based on our aggregate 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%

Quadro K6000 8052
+181%
M1000M 2868

K6000 outperforms M1000M by 181% 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%

Quadro K6000 22898
+172%
M1000M 8433

K6000 outperforms M1000M by 172% 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%

Quadro K6000 25339
+226%
M1000M 7778

K6000 outperforms M1000M by 226% 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%

Quadro K6000 17571
+107%
M1000M 8471

K6000 outperforms M1000M by 107% 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%

Quadro K6000 87
+263%
M1000M 24

K6000 outperforms M1000M by 263% 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 HD100−110
+178%
36
−178%
4K30−35
+150%
12
−150%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.85 7.43
Recency 23 July 2013 2 October 2015
Cost $5265 $200.89
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB/4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 40 Watt

The Quadro K6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation card while Quadro M1000M is a mobile 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 K6000
Quadro K6000
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
Quadro M1000M

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.


3.9 106 votes

Rate Quadro K6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 492 votes

Rate Quadro M1000M 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.