Radeon Pro WX 4150 vs Quadro P6000

Place in performance ranking	103	531
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	19.51	0.46
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code name	GP102	Polaris 11
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	1 October 2016 (7 years ago)	1 March 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$5,999	no data
Current price	$989 (0.2x MSRP)	$2000

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P6000 has 4141% better value for money than Pro WX 4150.

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	3840	896
Core clock speed	1506 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1645 MHz	1053 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	394.8	58.97
Floating-point performance	12,634 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro P6000 and Radeon Pro WX 4150 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	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2" (5.1 cm)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 8-pin	None
SLI options	+	no data

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	384 Bit	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	9016 MHz	7000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 432 GB/s	96 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	DVI-D DP DP DP DP 3-pin Stereo	No outputs
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
Multi-display synchronization	Quadro Sync II	no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	no data	+
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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	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 P6000 39.18
+485%

Pro WX 4150 6.70

Quadro P6000 outperforms Radeon Pro WX 4150 by 485% 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 P6000 15132
+485%

Pro WX 4150 2587

Quadro P6000 outperforms Radeon Pro WX 4150 by 485% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12
+1000%

1−2

−1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Hitman 3	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Hitman 3	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +575%	4−5 −575%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+500%

3−4
−500%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Hitman 3	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

+500%

2−3
−500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6	0−1
Hitman 3	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+600%

1−2

−600%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.18	6.70
Recency	1 October 2016	1 March 2017
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	50 Watt