Radeon Pro WX 4100 vs Quadro K6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K6000 and Radeon Pro WX 4100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
20.90
+122%

Quadro K6000 outperforms Pro WX 4100 by a whopping 122% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking260462
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.303.90
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGK110BBaffin
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)10 November 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 $399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro WX 4100 has 200% better value for money than Quadro K6000.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores28801024
Core clock speed797 MHz1125 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHz1201 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate216.576.86
Floating-point performance5.196 gflops2.46 gflops

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 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed6008 MHz6000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s96 GB/s

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 DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA3.5-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 20.90
+122%
Pro WX 4100 9.43

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 8064
+122%
Pro WX 4100 3639

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 24055
+26.1%
Pro WX 4100 19073

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 25167
+35.6%
Pro WX 4100 18563

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 20.90 9.43
Recency 23 July 2013 10 November 2016
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 121.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro WX 4100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 350% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro WX 4100 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
AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100
Radeon Pro WX 4100

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
3.6 46 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 4100 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.