Quadro T500 Mobile vs Quadro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
M2000 M3000 SE M4000 M5000 M5000 SE M6000 M6000 24 GB
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
T400 Mobile T500 Mobile T600 Mobile T1000 Mobile T1000 Max-Q T1200 Max-Q T1200 Mobile T2000 Mobile T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M6000 with Quadro T500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M6000
2015, $4,200
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
28.12
+241%

M6000 outperforms T500 Mobile by a whopping 241% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
T500 Mobile T500 Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking228547
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.41no data
Power efficiency8.6435.16
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM200TU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date21 March 2015 (10 years ago)2 December 2020 (4 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 cores3072896
Core clock speed988 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate213.994.92
Floating-point processing power6.844 TFLOPS3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs19256
L1 Cache1.1 MB896 KB
L2 Cache3 MB1024 KB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount12 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth317.4 GB/s80 GB/s
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 outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA5.27.5

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 HD120−130
+233%
36
−233%
1440p50−55
+233%
15
−233%
4K55−60
+224%
17
−224%

Cost per frame, $

1080p35.00no data
1440p84.00no data
4K76.36no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Dota 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 31
+0%
31
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+0%
13
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14
+0%
14
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how Quadro M6000 and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M6000 is 233% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M6000 is 233% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro M6000 is 224% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 50 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 28.12 8.24
Recency 21 March 2015 2 December 2020
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 18 Watt

Quadro M6000 has a 241.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T500 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1288.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T500 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M6000 is a workstation graphics card while Quadro T500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile
Like
Like

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
Tesla P40 Tesla P40
T500 Mobile Quadro T500 Mobile
vs
Pro 460 Radeon Pro 460
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Instinct MI60 Radeon Instinct MI60
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
GTX 1050 GeForce GTX 1050
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
GT 520 PCI GeForce GT 520 PCI
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Jetson Xavier NX GPU Jetson Xavier NX GPU
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
RX 6500 XT Radeon RX 6500 XT
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
CMP 30HX CMP 30HX
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
H100 PCIe H100 PCIe
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
T500 Max-Q T500 Max-Q
Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000
vs
Tesla T4G Tesla T4G
Quadro K1200 Quadro K1200
vs
GeForce MX110 GeForce MX110

Community ratings

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

2.5 154 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 113 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M6000 or Quadro T500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.