FirePro V7900 vs Quadro P6000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P6000 and FirePro V7900, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P6000
2016
24 GB 384-bit, 250 Watt
39.68
+565%

P6000 outperforms V7900 by a whopping 565% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking108585
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.89no data
Power efficiency11.072.78
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameGP102Cayman
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)24 May 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 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 cores38401280
Core clock speed1506 MHz725 MHz
Boost clock speed1645 MHzno data
Number of transistors11,800 million2,640 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt151 Watt
Texture fill rate394.858.00
Floating-point processing power12.63 TFLOPS1.856 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs24080

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 2.1 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm279 mm
Width2" (5.1 cm)1-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectors1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin
SLI options+-

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 type384 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount24 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 432 GB/s160 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 DisplayPort4x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Sync IIno data
StereoOutput3D-+
DisplayPort countno data4
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

ECC (Error Correcting Code)+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.1-

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 P6000 39.68
+565%
FirePro V7900 5.97

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 P6000 15307
+564%
FirePro V7900 2304

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 39.68 5.97
Recency 1 October 2016 24 May 2011
Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 151 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 564.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.

FirePro V7900, on the other hand, has 65.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V7900 in performance tests.


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 P6000
Quadro P6000
AMD FirePro V7900
FirePro V7900

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.


3.6 89 votes

Rate Quadro P6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 16 votes

Rate FirePro V7900 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.