Radeon 780M vs Quadro M6000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M6000 with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M6000
2015
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
28.37
+68.2%

M6000 outperforms 780M by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking199321
Place by popularitynot in top-10065
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.55no data
Power efficiency8.3182.37
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameGM200Hawx Point
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date21 March 2015 (10 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,199.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores3072768
Core clock speed988 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHz2700 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate213.9129.6
Floating-point processing power6.844 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs19248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount12 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1653 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth317.4 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA5.2-

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.

Quadro M6000 28.37
+68.2%
Radeon 780M 16.87

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.

Quadro M6000 11778
+68.1%
Radeon 780M 7005

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 HD60−65
+66.7%
36
−66.7%
1440p35−40
+59.1%
22
−59.1%
4K21−24
+61.5%
13
−61.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p70.00no data
1440p120.00no data
4K200.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
+0%
39
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35
+0%
35
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 82
+0%
82
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 31
+0%
31
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65
+0%
65
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 26
+0%
26
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+0%
15
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
+0%
18
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+0%
15
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21
+0%
21
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how Quadro M6000 and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M6000 is 67% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M6000 is 59% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro M6000 is 62% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.37 16.87
Recency 21 March 2015 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro M6000 has a 68.2% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 780M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 780M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M6000 is a workstation card while Radeon 780M is a notebook 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
AMD Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M

Other comparisons

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.


2.4 152 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1832 votes

Rate Radeon 780M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M6000 or Radeon 780M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.