Quadro M6000 24 GB vs Radeon Pro Vega 56

Place in performance ranking	163	167
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	2.95	4.98
Architecture	Vega (2017−2021)	Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)
GPU code name	Vega	GM200
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	14 December 2017 (6 years old)	5 March 2016 (8 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	$4,999
Current price	$4999 (12.5x MSRP)	$2104 (0.4x MSRP)

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

M6000 24 GB has 69% better value for money than Pro Vega 56.

Technical specs

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	3584	3072
Core clock speed	1247 MHz	988 MHz
Boost clock speed	1250 MHz	1114 MHz
Number of transistors	12,500 million	8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	280.0	285.2
Floating-point performance	9,677 gflops	6,844 gflops

Size and 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 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Width	IGP	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-pin

Memory

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	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	2048 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	786 MHz	6612 MHz
Memory bandwidth	402.4 GB/s	317.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

Video outputs and ports

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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort
HDMI	+	no data

API support

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.125	+
CUDA	no data	5.2

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.

Pro Vega 56 31.90
+4.1%

M6000 24 GB 30.64

Radeon Pro Vega 56 outperforms Quadro M6000 24 GB by 4% based on our aggregated 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%

Pro Vega 56 12353
+4.1%

M6000 24 GB 11868

Radeon Pro Vega 56 outperforms Quadro M6000 24 GB by 4% in Passmark.

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	99 +4.2%	95−100 −4.2%
4K	57 +14%	50−55 −14%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

50−55
+8%

50−55

−8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +12%	50−55 −12%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +8.9%	90−95 −8.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 +7.5%	80−85 −7.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +8%	50−55 −8%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +9.3%	75−80 −9.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +6.7%	75−80 −6.7%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +7.4%	95−100 −7.4%
Hitman 3	95−100 +4.2%	95−100 −4.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 +6.2%	65−70 −6.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +13.3%	45−50 −13.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 +5.7%	70−75 −5.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +12%	50−55 −12%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +8.9%	90−95 −8.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	85−90 +7.5%	80−85 −7.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +8%	50−55 −8%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +9.3%	75−80 −9.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +6.7%	75−80 −6.7%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +7.4%	95−100 −7.4%
Hitman 3	95−100 +4.2%	95−100 −4.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70 +6.2%	65−70 −6.2%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +10%	50−55 −10%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +13.3%	45−50 −13.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 +5.7%	70−75 −5.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	116 +5.5%	110−120 −5.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +12%	50−55 −12%
Battlefield 5	95−100 +8.9%	90−95 −8.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +8%	50−55 −8%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +9.3%	75−80 −9.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	80−85 +6.7%	75−80 −6.7%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +7.4%	95−100 −7.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	64 +6.7%	60−65 −6.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +13.3%	45−50 −13.3%
Hitman 3	55−60 +12%	50−55 −12%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +7.5%	40−45 −7.5%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +13.3%	30−33 −13.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +12.5%	40−45 −12.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 +16.7%	30−33 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +13.3%	30−33 −13.3%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +6.2%	65−70 −6.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +9.5%	21−24 −9.5%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +14%	50−55 −14%
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65 +10.9%	55−60 −10.9%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +11.7%	60−65 −11.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +5%	40−45 −5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +12.5%	24−27 −12.5%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +12.5%	24−27 −12.5%
Hitman 3	30−35 +14.8%	27−30 −14.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +4.8%	21−24 −4.8%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +16.7%	18−20 −16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +14.3%	21−24 −14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	42 +5%	40−45 −5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +16.7%	18−20 −16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Battlefield 5	35−40 +11.4%	35−40 −11.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +7.4%	27−30 −7.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +12.5%	40−45 −12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +14.3%	14−16 −14.3%

This is how Pro Vega 56 and M6000 24 GB compete in popular games:

Pro Vega 56 is 4.2% faster than M6000 24 GB in 1080p
Pro Vega 56 is 14% faster than M6000 24 GB in 4K

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	31.90	30.64
Recency	14 December 2017	5 March 2016
Cost	$399	$4999
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	250 Watt