Quadro M1000M vs Quadro P6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P6000 with Quadro M1000M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P6000
2016
24 GB 384-bit, 250 Watt
34.73
+445%

P6000 outperforms M1000M by a whopping 445% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking117552
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.154.12
Power efficiency10.9912.60
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGP102GM107
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)18 August 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 $200.89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Quadro P6000 has 1% better value for money than M1000M.

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 cores3840512
Core clock speed1506 MHz993 MHz
Boost clock speed1645 MHz1072 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate394.831.78
Floating-point processing power12.63 TFLOPS1.017 TFLOPS
ROPs9616
TMUs24032

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width2" (5.1 cm)no data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 8-pinNone
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/4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 432 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Sync IIno data
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA6.15.0

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 P6000 34.73
+445%
M1000M 6.37

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 15515
+445%
M1000M 2848

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 P6000 64092
+652%
M1000M 8520

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 P6000 70226
+779%
M1000M 7991

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro P6000 47462
+460%
M1000M 8471

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 HD210−220
+438%
39
−438%
4K70−75
+438%
13
−438%

Cost per frame, $

1080p28.57
−455%
5.15
+455%
4K85.70
−455%
15.45
+455%
  • M1000M has 455% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • M1000M has 455% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how Quadro P6000 and M1000M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P6000 is 438% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P6000 is 438% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.73 6.37
Recency 1 October 2016 18 August 2015
Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 2 GB/4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 40 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 445.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

M1000M, on the other hand, has 525% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P6000 is a workstation card while Quadro M1000M 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 P6000
Quadro P6000
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
Quadro M1000M

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.


3.7 98 votes

Rate Quadro P6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 583 votes

Rate Quadro M1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P6000 or Quadro M1000M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.