Radeon R9 285 vs Quadro K6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K6000 with Radeon R9 285, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K6000
2013
12 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
20.91
+20.6%

K6000 outperforms R9 285 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking263315
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.248.76
Power efficiency6.376.26
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGK110BTonga
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,265 $249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 285 has 606% better value for money than Quadro K6000.

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 cores28801792
Core clock speed797 MHz918 MHz
Boost clock speed902 MHzno data
Number of transistors7,080 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate216.5102.8
Floating-point processing power5.196 TFLOPS3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs240112

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 mm221 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin2x 6-pin

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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s176.0 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 DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan+1.2.170
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
+20.6%
R9 285 17.34

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
+20.6%
R9 285 6680

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 17.34
Recency 23 July 2013 2 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 190 Watt

Quadro K6000 has a 20.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R9 285, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 18.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 285 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K6000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 285 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 K6000
Quadro K6000
AMD Radeon R9 285
Radeon R9 285

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
4.2 77 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 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.