Radeon R9 M375 vs Quadro 6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 6000 with Radeon R9 M375, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 6000
2010, $4,399
6 GB GDDR5, 204 Watt
6.44
+168%

6000 outperforms R9 M375 by a whopping 168% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking619889
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
Power efficiency2.43no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameGF100Tropo
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date10 December 2010 (15 years ago)5 May 2015 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$4,399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores448640
Compute unitsno data10
Core clock speed574 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1015 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Wattno data
Texture fill rate32.1440.60
Floating-point processing power1.028 TFLOPS1.299 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs5640
L1 Cache896 KB160 KB
L2 Cache768 KB256 KB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed747 MHz1100 MHz
Memory bandwidth143.4 GB/s28.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoNo outputs
Eyefinity-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.1Not Listed
VulkanN/A-
Mantle-+
CUDA2.0-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Quadro 6000 6.44
+168%
R9 M375 2.40

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 2692
+168%
Samples: 261
R9 M375 1005
Samples: 95

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 HD60−65
+161%
23
−161%

Cost per frame, $

1080p73.32no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 15
+0%
15
+0%
Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 17
+0%
17
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16
+0%
16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 13
+0%
13
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Quadro 6000 and R9 M375 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 6000 is 161% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.44 2.40
Recency 10 December 2010 5 May 2015
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

Quadro 6000 has a 168.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R9 M375, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M375 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 6000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 M375 is a notebook 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 Quadro 6000
Quadro 6000
AMD Radeon R9 M375
Radeon R9 M375

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.


3.8 41 votes

Rate Quadro 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 61 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M375 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 6000 or Radeon R9 M375, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.