Radeon HD 6970M vs Quadro M6000

Place in performance ranking	168	558
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.23	2.02
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)	Terascale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GM200	Blackcomb XT
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	21 March 2015 (9 years ago)	6 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$4,199.99	no data
Current price	$1792 (0.4x MSRP)	$257

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro M6000 has 208% better value for money than HD 6970M.

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 cores	3072	960
Core clock speed	988 MHz	680 MHz
Boost clock speed	1114 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	8,000 million	1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	75-100 Watt
Texture fill rate	213.9	32.64
Floating-point performance	6,844 gflops	1,305.6 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M6000 and Radeon HD 6970M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	6612 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	317.4 GB/s	115.2 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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

1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.0
OpenGL	4.6	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	5.2	no 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
+420%

HD 6970M 5.88

Quadro M6000 outperforms Radeon HD 6970M by 420% 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
+420%

HD 6970M 2270

Quadro M6000 outperforms Radeon HD 6970M by 420% in Passmark.

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:

900p	270−280 +419%	52 −419%
Full HD	270−280 +419%	52 −419%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

50−55
+400%

10−11

−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +400%	12−14 −400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +400%	16−18 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +400%	12−14 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +400%	10−11 −400%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +400%	16−18 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +400%	27−30 −400%
Hitman 3	55−60 +400%	10−12 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +400%	27−30 −400%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +400%	16−18 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	95−100 +400%	18−20 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +420%	24−27 −420%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +400%	12−14 −400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Battlefield 5	80−85 +400%	16−18 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +400%	12−14 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +400%	10−11 −400%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +400%	16−18 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +400%	27−30 −400%
Hitman 3	55−60 +400%	10−12 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +400%	27−30 −400%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +400%	16−18 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	95−100 +400%	18−20 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +420%	24−27 −420%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +400%	12−14 −400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	60−65 +400%	12−14 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +400%	10−11 −400%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +400%	27−30 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +400%	27−30 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	95−100 +400%	18−20 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +420%	24−27 −420%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

80−85
+400%

16−18

−400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +400%	10−12 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 +400%	8−9 −400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +380%	5−6 −380%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	40−45 +400%	8−9 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +400%	9−10 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +400%	10−11 −400%
Hitman 3	50−55 +400%	10−11 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 +400%	12−14 −400%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +380%	5−6 −380%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +380%	5−6 −380%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55
+400%

10−11

−400%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +380%	5−6 −380%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Hitman 3	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +400%	7−8 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−33

+400%

6−7
−400%

This is how Quadro M6000 and HD 6970M compete in popular games:

Quadro M6000 is 419% faster in 900p
Quadro M6000 is 419% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	30.59	5.88
Recency	21 March 2015	6 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	75 Watt