Quadro RTX 6000 vs Titan X Pascal

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal with Quadro RTX 6000, including specs and performance data.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.69

RTX 6000 outperforms Titan X Pascal by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking16171
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.925.72
Power efficiency9.3012.79
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP102TU102
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $6,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Titan X Pascal has 21% better value for money than RTX 6000.

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 cores35844608
Core clock speed1417 MHz1440 MHz
Boost clock speed1531 MHz1770 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate342.9509.8
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs9696
TMUs224288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72

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 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount12 GB24 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/s672.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA+7.5
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.

Titan X Pascal 33.69
RTX 6000 48.20
+43.1%

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.

Titan X Pascal 13026
RTX 6000 18637
+43.1%

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 HD128
−40.6%
180−190
+40.6%
1440p76
−31.6%
100−110
+31.6%
4K59
−35.6%
80−85
+35.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.37
+274%
34.99
−274%
1440p15.78
+299%
62.99
−299%
4K20.32
+287%
78.74
−287%
  • Titan X Pascal has 274% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal has 299% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal has 287% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 173
−38.7%
240−250
+38.7%
Counter-Strike 2 92
−41.3%
130−140
+41.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 83
−32.5%
110−120
+32.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 127
−41.7%
180−190
+41.7%
Battlefield 5 153
−37.3%
210−220
+37.3%
Counter-Strike 2 74
−35.1%
100−105
+35.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
−35.1%
100−105
+35.1%
Far Cry 5 162
−42%
230−240
+42%
Fortnite 210
−42.9%
300−310
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 127
−41.7%
180−190
+41.7%
Forza Horizon 5 124
−37.1%
170−180
+37.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 113
−41.6%
160−170
+41.6%
Valorant 296
−35.1%
400−450
+35.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 78
−41%
110−120
+41%
Battlefield 5 147
−42.9%
210−220
+42.9%
Counter-Strike 2 63
−42.9%
90−95
+42.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
−26.8%
350−400
+26.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 65
−38.5%
90−95
+38.5%
Dota 2 252
−38.9%
350−400
+38.9%
Far Cry 5 149
−40.9%
210−220
+40.9%
Fortnite 199
−40.7%
280−290
+40.7%
Forza Horizon 4 121
−40.5%
170−180
+40.5%
Forza Horizon 5 113
−41.6%
160−170
+41.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 160
−37.5%
220−230
+37.5%
Metro Exodus 96
−35.4%
130−140
+35.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 113
−41.6%
160−170
+41.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 184
−41.3%
260−270
+41.3%
Valorant 275
−27.3%
350−400
+27.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 137
−38.7%
190−200
+38.7%
Counter-Strike 2 55
−36.4%
75−80
+36.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 57
−40.4%
80−85
+40.4%
Dota 2 232
−29.3%
300−310
+29.3%
Far Cry 5 140
−42.9%
200−210
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 112
−42.9%
160−170
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 97
−34%
130−140
+34%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 102
−37.3%
140−150
+37.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
−36.8%
130−140
+36.8%
Valorant 181
−38.1%
250−260
+38.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170
−41.2%
240−250
+41.2%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
−38.2%
300−310
+38.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 103
−35.9%
140−150
+35.9%
Metro Exodus 58
−37.9%
80−85
+37.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−42.9%
250−260
+42.9%
Valorant 258
−35.7%
350−400
+35.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
−42.9%
120−130
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 37
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Far Cry 5 101
−38.6%
140−150
+38.6%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
−39.5%
120−130
+39.5%
Forza Horizon 5 72
−38.9%
100−105
+38.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−42.9%
80−85
+42.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
−37.5%
110−120
+37.5%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
−40%
35−40
+40%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Grand Theft Auto V 99
−41.4%
140−150
+41.4%
Metro Exodus 36
−38.9%
50−55
+38.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
−39.7%
95−100
+39.7%
Valorant 257
−36.2%
350−400
+36.2%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 71
−40.8%
100−105
+40.8%
Counter-Strike 2 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Dota 2 160
−37.5%
220−230
+37.5%
Far Cry 5 53
−41.5%
75−80
+41.5%
Forza Horizon 4 73
−37%
100−105
+37%
Forza Horizon 5 45
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 44
−36.4%
60−65
+36.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60
−41.7%
85−90
+41.7%

This is how Titan X Pascal and RTX 6000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 is 41% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 6000 is 32% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 6000 is 36% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.69 48.20
Recency 2 August 2016 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 260 Watt

Titan X Pascal has 4% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000, on the other hand, has a 43.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 33.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Titan X Pascal in performance tests.

Be aware that Titan X Pascal is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 6000 is a workstation one.

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 Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
Quadro RTX 6000

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.


2.6 3001 vote

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 134 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Titan X Pascal or Quadro RTX 6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.