Quadro RTX 6000 vs GeForce MX110

Place in the ranking	717	70
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	5.85
Power efficiency	8.50	12.86
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GM108S	TU102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	17 November 2017 (7 years ago)	13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$6,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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	256	4608
Core clock speed	978 MHz	1440 MHz
Boost clock speed	1006 MHz	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	1,020 million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	16.10	509.8
Floating-point processing power	0.5151 TFLOPS	16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	96
TMUs	16	288
Tensor Cores	no data	576
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	72

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 3.0 x4	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	40.1 GB/s	672.0 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 Connectors

Portable Device Dependent

4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	6.7 (5.1)	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.0
Vulkan	1.3	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

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.

GeForce MX110 3.46

RTX 6000 45.36
+1211%

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.

GeForce MX110 1425

RTX 6000 18692
+1212%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GeForce MX110 4265

RTX 6000 148239
+3376%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

GeForce MX110 3348

RTX 6000 126987
+3693%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

GeForce MX110 4625

RTX 6000 159550
+3350%

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

−1150%

200−210
+1150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

31.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1194%	220−230 +1194%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
Metro Exodus	10 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	13 −1208%	170−180 +1208%
Valorant	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Dota 2	21 −1186%	270−280 +1186%
Far Cry 5	23 −1204%	300−310 +1204%
Fortnite	17 −1194%	220−230 +1194%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1194%	220−230 +1194%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
Grand Theft Auto V	13 −1208%	170−180 +1208%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	34 −1076%	400−450 +1076%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −1150%	150−160 +1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −1208%	170−180 +1208%
Valorant	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
World of Tanks	45 −1122%	550−600 +1122%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Dota 2	33 −1112%	400−450 +1112%
Far Cry 5	15 −1167%	190−200 +1167%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1194%	220−230 +1194%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	8 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Valorant	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
World of Tanks	24−27 −1054%	300−310 +1054%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −1150%	100−105 +1150%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 −1200%	65−70 +1200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −1186%	90−95 +1186%
Valorant	10−12 −1173%	140−150 +1173%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Dota 2	16−18 −1150%	200−210 +1150%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −1150%	200−210 +1150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −1200%	130−140 +1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −1150%	200−210 +1150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Counter-Strike 2	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Dota 2	16−18 −1150%	200−210 +1150%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1150%	50−55 +1150%
Fortnite	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Valorant	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%

This is how GeForce MX110 and RTX 6000 compete in popular games:

RTX 6000 is 1150% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.46	45.36
Recency	17 November 2017	13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	260 Watt

GeForce MX110 has 766.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000, on the other hand, has a 1211% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX110 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX110 is a notebook card while Quadro RTX 6000 is a workstation one.

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