FirePro V7900 vs Quadro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M6000 and FirePro V7900, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M6000
2015
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
30.59
+412%

Quadro M6000 outperforms FirePro V7900 by a whopping 412% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking168555
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.232.39
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameGM200Cayman
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date21 March 2015 (9 years ago)24 May 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,199.99 no data
Current price$1792 (0.4x MSRP)$165

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro M6000 has 161% better value for money than FirePro V7900.

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 cores30721280
Core clock speed988 MHz725 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHzno data
Number of transistors8,000 million2,640 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt151 Watt
Texture fill rate213.958.00
Floating-point performance6,844 gflops1,856.0 gflops

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 2.1 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm279 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed6612 MHz5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth317.4 GB/s160 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort
StereoOutput3Dno data1
DisplayPort countno data4
Dual-link DVI supportno data1

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.2no data

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 M6000 30.59
+412%
FirePro V7900 5.97

Quadro M6000 outperforms FirePro V7900 by 412% 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 M6000 11815
+413%
FirePro V7900 2304

Quadro M6000 outperforms FirePro V7900 by 413% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.59 5.97
Recency 21 March 2015 24 May 2011
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 151 Watt

The Quadro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V7900 in performance tests.


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 M6000
Quadro M6000
AMD FirePro V7900
FirePro V7900

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.


2.4 145 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 16 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 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.