Radeon Pro W6300M vs Quadro K6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking259not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.24no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2023)
GPU code nameGK110BNavi 24
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 no data

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 cores2880768
Core clock speed797 MHz1512 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz2040 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate216.597.92
Floating-point processing power5.196 gflops3.133 gflops
ROPs4832
TMUs24048

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit32 Bit
Memory clock speed6008 MHz16 GB/s
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s64 GB/s

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 compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA3.5-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 July 2013 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 25 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro W6300M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 800% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K6000 and Radeon Pro W6300M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation card while Radeon Pro W6300M 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
AMD Radeon Pro W6300M
Radeon Pro W6300M

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.


3.9 108 votes

Rate Quadro K6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Pro W6300M 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.