Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs Quadro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M6000 with Radeon Pro Vega 48, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M6000
2015
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
30.51
+4.1%

M6000 outperforms Pro Vega 48 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking182193
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.32no data
Power efficiency8.36no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGM200Vega 10
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date21 March 2015 (9 years ago)19 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,199.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores30723072
Core clock speed988 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speed1114 MHz1300 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate213.9249.6
Floating-point processing power6.844 TFLOPS7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
TMUs192192

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 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount12 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz786 MHz
Memory bandwidth317.4 GB/s402.4 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 DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.1.125
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. 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 30.51
+4.1%
Pro Vega 48 29.32

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 11758
+4.1%
Pro Vega 48 11299

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro M6000 39571
Pro Vega 48 53770
+35.9%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro M6000 47116
Pro Vega 48 58063
+23.2%

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 30.51 29.32
Recency 21 March 2015 19 March 2019
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

Quadro M6000 has a 4.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro Vega 48, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M6000 and Radeon Pro Vega 48.

Be aware that Quadro M6000 is a workstation card while Radeon Pro Vega 48 is a mobile workstation one.


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 Radeon Pro Vega 48
Radeon Pro Vega 48

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.


2.4 150 votes

Rate Quadro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 75 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 48 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.