Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs Quadro P6000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P6000 with Radeon Pro Vega 56, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P6000
2016
24 GB 384-bit, 250 Watt
39.67
+23.9%

P6000 outperforms Pro Vega 56 by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking108171
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.8644.58
Power efficiency11.0310.60
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGP102Vega 10
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)14 August 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 $399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro Vega 56 has 1055% better value for money than Quadro P6000.

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 cores38403584
Core clock speed1506 MHz1138 MHz
Boost clock speed1645 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt210 Watt
Texture fill rate394.8280.0
Floating-point processing power12.63 TFLOPS8.96 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
TMUs240224

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" (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 BitHBM2
Maximum RAM amount24 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz786 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 432 GB/s402.4 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Sync IIno data
HDMI-+

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.

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.125
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 39.67
+23.9%
Pro Vega 56 32.02

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
+23.9%
Pro Vega 56 12353

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 64226
+4.4%
Pro Vega 56 61544

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 77200
+17.2%
Pro Vega 56 65862

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 HD120−130
+18.8%
101
−18.8%
4K65−70
+22.6%
53
−22.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p49.993.95
4K92.297.53

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hitman 3 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hitman 3 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hitman 3 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+0%
64
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Hitman 3 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
+0%
42
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how Quadro P6000 and Pro Vega 56 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P6000 is 19% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P6000 is 23% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.67 32.02
Recency 1 October 2016 14 August 2017
Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 210 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 23.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro Vega 56, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 months, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 19% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 56 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P6000 is a workstation card while Radeon Pro Vega 56 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 P6000
Quadro P6000
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56
Radeon Pro Vega 56

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
3.5 89 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 56 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.