Quadro P500 vs FirePro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M6000 and Quadro P500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro M6000
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 43 Watt
4.72
+11.6%

M6000 outperforms P500 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking647683
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.5316.11
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameHeathrowGP108
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 July 2012 (12 years ago)5 January 2018 (6 years ago)

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 cores640256
Core clock speed800 MHz1455 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1518 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)43 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate32.0024.29
Floating-point processing power1.024 TFLOPS0.7772 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4016

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportn/ano data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Form factorMXM-Bno data
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s40.1 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
StereoOutput3D+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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. 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.

FirePro M6000 4.72
+11.6%
Quadro P500 4.23

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.

FirePro M6000 1820
+11.7%
Quadro P500 1630

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

FirePro M6000 2422
Quadro P500 3022
+24.8%

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:

900p58
+16%
50−55
−16%
Full HD39
+95%
20
−95%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−50%
15
+50%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+16%
24−27
−16%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+4.7%
40−45
−4.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−40%
14
+40%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+16%
24−27
−16%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+4.7%
40−45
−4.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+25%
8
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+16%
24−27
−16%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+113%
8
−113%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+4.7%
40−45
−4.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+15.4%
24−27
−15.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how FirePro M6000 and Quadro P500 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro M6000 is 16% faster in 900p
  • FirePro M6000 is 95% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the FirePro M6000 is 400% faster.
  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P500 is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FirePro M6000 is ahead in 47 tests (72%)
  • Quadro P500 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (25%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.72 4.23
Recency 1 July 2012 5 January 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 43 Watt 18 Watt

FirePro M6000 has a 11.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Quadro P500, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 138.9% lower power consumption.

The FirePro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


AMD FirePro M6000
FirePro M6000
NVIDIA Quadro P500
Quadro P500

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.5 15 votes

Rate FirePro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 30 votes

Rate Quadro P500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.