Quadro T1000 vs Quadro K6000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K6000 and Quadro T1000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
20.91
+24.5%

K6000 outperforms T1000 by a significant 25% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking263324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.24no data
Power efficiency6.3723.02
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGK110BTU117
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores2880no data
Core clock speed797 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt50 Watt
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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount12 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1502 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/sno data

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 outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12.0 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.5-

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.

Quadro K6000 20.91
+24.5%
Quadro T1000 16.79

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 K6000 8059
+24.6%
Quadro T1000 6469

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.

Quadro K6000 24053
Quadro T1000 33875
+40.8%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro K6000 25253
Quadro T1000 30130
+19.3%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro K6000 17571
Quadro T1000 34236
+94.8%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.91 16.79
Recency 23 July 2013 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 24.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Quadro T1000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T1000 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.


NVIDIA Quadro K6000
Quadro K6000
NVIDIA Quadro T1000
Quadro T1000

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.


3.9 108 votes

Rate Quadro K6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 407 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 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.