RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile vs RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell
Aggregate performance score
We've compared RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell with RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile outperforms RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell by a whopping 304% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 609 | 244 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.19 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.84 | 58.11 |
| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) |
| GPU code name | GB202 | GB207 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 18 March 2025 (less than a year ago) | 19 March 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $8,565 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 24064 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 1590 MHz | 2235 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2617 MHz | 2520 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 92,200 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 600 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 1,968 | 141.1 |
| Floating-point processing power | 126 TFLOPS | 9.032 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 192 | 24 |
| TMUs | 752 | 56 |
| Tensor Cores | 752 | 56 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 188 | 14 |
| L1 Cache | 23.5 MB | 1.8 MB |
| L2 Cache | 128 MB | 24 MB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | 304 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 16-pin | 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 | GDDR7 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 96 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 1.79 TB/s | 336.0 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 Connectors | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | 12.0 | 12.0 |
| DLSS | + | + |
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 HD | 18−20
−311%
| 74
+311%
|
| 1440p | 9−10
−344%
| 40
+344%
|
| 4K | 7−8
−314%
| 29
+314%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 475.83 | no data |
| 1440p | 951.67 | no data |
| 4K | 1223.57 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 99
+0%
|
99
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Valorant | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 89
+0%
|
89
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 113
+0%
|
113
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Valorant | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 85
+0%
|
85
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
This is how RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell and RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile is 311% faster in 1080p
- RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile is 344% faster in 1440p
- RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile is 314% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.51 | 26.27 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 96 GB | 6 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 600 Watt | 35 Watt |
RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile, on the other hand, has a 303.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 1614.3% lower power consumption.
The RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell in performance tests.
Be aware that RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is a workstation graphics card while RTX PRO 500 Blackwell Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
