Quadro P600 vs RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell and Quadro P600, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell
2025
16 GB GDDR7, 70 Watt
34.28
+333%

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell outperforms P600 by a whopping 333% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking162547
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.60
Power efficiency37.3115.06
ArchitectureBlackwell 2.0 (2025)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGB206GP107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date11 August 2025 (recently)7 February 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$178

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores4352384
Core clock speed790 MHz1430 MHz
Boost clock speed1950 MHz1620 MHz
Number of transistors21,900 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate265.238.88
Floating-point processing power16.97 TFLOPS1.244 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs13624
Tensor Cores136no data
Ray Tracing Cores34no data

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 5.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Length167 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR7GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz1252 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.0 GB/s80.13 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1bPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.86.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.41.3
CUDA12.06.1
DLSS+-

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.

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell 34.28
+333%
Quadro P600 7.91

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.

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell 14363
+333%
Quadro P600 3316

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 HD150−160
+317%
36
−317%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.94

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
God of War 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
God of War 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 81
+0%
81
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
God of War 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+0%
25
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 72
+0%
72
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
God of War 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
God of War 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
God of War 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell and Quadro P600 compete in popular games:

  • RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is 317% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.28 7.91
Recency 11 August 2025 7 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 5 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 40 Watt

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell has a 333.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro P600, on the other hand, has 75% lower power consumption.

The RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P600 in performance tests.

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 RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell
RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell
NVIDIA Quadro P600
Quadro P600

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 241 votes

Rate Quadro P600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell or Quadro P600, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.