Radeon RX 6950 XT vs Quadro M2000M

Place in the ranking	483	15
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	27.09
Power efficiency	11.27	15.06
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM107	Navi 21
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	3 December 2015 (8 years ago)	10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$1,099

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 cores	640	5120
Core clock speed	1029 MHz	1925 MHz
Boost clock speed	1098 MHz	2324 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	335 Watt
Texture fill rate	43.92	743.7
Floating-point processing power	1.405 TFLOPS	23.8 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	128
TMUs	40	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	80

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 8-pin

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	576.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	5.0	-

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. 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.

M2000M 8.97

RX 6950 XT 72.98
+714%

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.

M2000M 3460

RX 6950 XT 28156
+714%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

M2000M 5143

RX 6950 XT 72228
+1304%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

M2000M 20567

RX 6950 XT 119918
+483%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

M2000M 4157

RX 6950 XT 59882
+1341%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

M2000M 29795

RX 6950 XT 229172
+669%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

M2000M 36

RX 6950 XT 143
+300%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

M2000M 70

RX 6950 XT 188
+167%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

M2000M 33

RX 6950 XT 53
+59.3%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

M2000M 46

RX 6950 XT 284
+519%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

M2000M 40

RX 6950 XT 139
+250%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

M2000M 15

RX 6950 XT 77
+422%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

M2000M 22

RX 6950 XT 286
+1206%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

M2000M 3

RX 6950 XT 29
+797%

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	32 −606%	226 +606%
1440p	16−18 −775%	140 +775%
4K	11 −673%	85 +673%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	4.86
1440p	no data	7.85
4K	no data	12.93

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

−1050%

161
+1050%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −586%	150−160 +586%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −915%	130−140 +915%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −770%	230−240 +770%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −921%	143 +921%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −457%	110−120 +457%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −624%	180−190 +624%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −303%	240−250 +303%
Hitman 3	16−18 −659%	120−130 +659%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −428%	260−270 +428%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −454%	150−160 +454%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −392%	120−130 +392%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −943%	300−350 +943%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −155%	150−160 +155%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −586%	150−160 +586%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −915%	130−140 +915%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −770%	230−240 +770%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −814%	128 +814%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −457%	110−120 +457%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −624%	180−190 +624%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −303%	240−250 +303%
Hitman 3	16−18 −659%	120−130 +659%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −428%	260−270 +428%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −454%	150−160 +454%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −392%	120−130 +392%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −1373%	442 +1373%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	72 −121%	150−160 +121%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −155%	150−160 +155%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −586%	150−160 +586%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −915%	130−140 +915%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −567%	120−130 +567%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −771%	122 +771%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −457%	110−120 +457%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −303%	240−250 +303%
Hitman 3	16−18 −659%	120−130 +659%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −536%	318 +536%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −1220%	396 +1220%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14 −1443%	216 +1443%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −78.3%	107 +78.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

−392%

120−130
+392%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −876%	160−170 +876%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −700%	110−120 +700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −867%	85−90 +867%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −1780%	90−95 +1780%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −811%	80−85 +811%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −2225%	93 +2225%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −740%	80−85 +740%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −613%	270−280 +613%
Hitman 3	12−14 −792%	100−110 +792%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −1242%	255 +1242%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −1000%	132 +1000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −2840%	294 +2840%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −1588%	130−140 +1588%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −321%	240−250 +321%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−687%

110−120
+687%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −1000%	85−90 +1000%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −1050%	65−70 +1050%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −528%	220−230 +528%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −1600%	110−120 +1600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9 −1500%	144 +1500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −1120%	60−65 +1120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −1375%	55−60 +1375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −1200%	50−55 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −4500%	46 +4500%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −900%	50−55 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −1100%	130−140 +1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −3340%	172 +3340%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −2067%	65 +2067%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

−811%

80−85
+811%

This is how M2000M and RX 6950 XT compete in popular games:

RX 6950 XT is 606% faster in 1080p
RX 6950 XT is 775% faster in 1440p
RX 6950 XT is 673% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6950 XT is 4500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 6950 XT surpassed M2000M in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.97	72.98
Recency	3 December 2015	10 May 2022
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	335 Watt

M2000M has 509.1% lower power consumption.

RX 6950 XT, on the other hand, has a 713.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6950 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6950 XT is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.