Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) vs Quadro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
M2000 M3000 SE M4000 M5000 M5000 SE M6000 M6000 24 GB
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
2 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 2-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) 3-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 4-Core iGPU (Arc) 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) 4-Core iGPU (Meteor / Arrow Lake) 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M6000 with Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake), including specs and performance data.

Quadro M6000
2015, $4,200
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
28.06
+197%

M6000 outperforms Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) by a whopping 197% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking228501
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.41no data
Power efficiency8.64no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Xe LPG (2023−2025)
GPU code nameGM200Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date21 March 2015 (11 years ago)14 December 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,199.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores30724
Core clock speed988 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHz1950 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate213.9no data
Floating-point processing power6.844 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs192no data
L1 Cache1.1 MB768 KB
L2 Cache3 MBno data

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 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount12 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1653 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth317.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA5.2-

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 HD55−60
+175%
20
−175%

Cost per frame, $

1080p76.36no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+0%
30
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how Quadro M6000 and Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M6000 is 175% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 54 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 28.06 9.45
Recency 21 March 2015 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

Quadro M6000 has a 197% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M6000 is a workstation graphics card while Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
PRO WX 9100 Radeon PRO WX 9100
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) Graphics 4 Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
vs
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) Graphics 4 Core iGPU (Arc)
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Vega Frontier Edition Vega Frontier Edition
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Radeon 610 Radeon 610
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
8400 GS PCI Rev. 2 GeForce 8400 GS PCI Rev. 2
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Radeon 660M Radeon 660M
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Radeon 880M Radeon 880M
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Arc Pro B70 Pro B70
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
Riva 128 PCI Riva 128 PCI
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
Plex 2200 S4 Plex 2200 S4
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
GRID M6-8Q GRID M6-8Q
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
GRID M3-3020 GRID M3-3020

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

2.5 156 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M6000 or Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.