GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile vs Quadro K6000

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K6000 with GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
18.02

RTX 3050 6GB Mobile outperforms K6000 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking279231
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.28no data
Power efficiency6.3628.69
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGK110BGN20-P0-R 6 GB
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)6 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 no data

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 cores28802560
Core clock speed797 MHz1237 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz1492 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate216.5no data
Floating-point processing power5.196 TFLOPSno data
ROPs48no data
TMUs240no data

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount12 GB6 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors2x DVI, 2x DisplayPortno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12_2
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.5-

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 HD55−60
−29.1%
71
+29.1%
1440p27−30
−25.9%
34
+25.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p95.73no data
1440p195.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 81
+0%
81
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 64
+0%
64
+0%
Far Cry 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 76
+0%
76
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 91
+0%
91
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 91
+0%
91
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
+0%
39
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 71
+0%
71
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+0%
50
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40
+0%
40
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 37
+0%
37
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how Quadro K6000 and RTX 3050 6GB Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is 29% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is 26% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.02 21.67
Recency 23 July 2013 6 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, on the other hand, has a 20.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K6000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile 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 K6000
Quadro K6000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 6GB

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.


4 109 votes

Rate Quadro K6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 761 vote

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K6000 or GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.