Radeon R7 250 vs Quadro 6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 6000 with Radeon R7 250, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 6000
2010
6 GB GDDR5, 204 Watt
6.97
+154%

6000 outperforms R7 250 by a whopping 154% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking555803
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.160.10
Power efficiency2.352.90
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGF100Oland
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date10 December 2010 (14 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,399 $89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 6000 has 60% better value for money than R7 250.

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 cores448384
Core clock speed574 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1050 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate32.1425.20
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPs488
TMUs5624

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length248 mm168 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinN/A

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 amount6 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed747 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth143.4 GB/s72 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, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.0-

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.

Quadro 6000 6.97
+154%
R7 250 2.74

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.

Quadro 6000 2685
+154%
R7 250 1056

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 HD50−55
+138%
21
−138%

Cost per frame, $

1080p87.984.24

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how Quadro 6000 and R7 250 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 6000 is 138% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.97 2.74
Recency 10 December 2010 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 204 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro 6000 has a 154.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 250, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 172% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 6000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R7 250 is a desktop one.


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.


NVIDIA Quadro 6000
Quadro 6000
AMD Radeon R7 250
Radeon R7 250

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.


3.8 40 votes

Rate Quadro 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 440 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250 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.