FirePro M6000 vs Quadro M2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000 with FirePro M6000, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2000
2016
4 GB 128-bit, 75 Watt
10.37
+120%

M2000 outperforms M6000 by a whopping 120% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking446654
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.11no data
Power efficiency9.507.54
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM206Heathrow
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date8 April 2016 (8 years ago)1 July 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$437.75 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 cores768640
Core clock speed796 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1163 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt43 Watt
Texture fill rate55.8232.00
Floating-point processing power1.786 TFLOPS1.024 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs4840

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 datan/a
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length201 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no data
Form factorno dataMXM-B
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 type128 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/s72 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
StereoOutput3D-+

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.2-

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.

Quadro M2000 10.37
+120%
FirePro M6000 4.72

  • Passmark

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 M2000 3995
+120%
FirePro M6000 1820

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:

900p120−130
+107%
58
−107%
Full HD90−95
+114%
42
−114%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.86no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how Quadro M2000 and FirePro M6000 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M2000 is 107% faster in 900p
  • Quadro M2000 is 114% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.37 4.72
Recency 8 April 2016 1 July 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 43 Watt

Quadro M2000 has a 119.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro M6000, on the other hand, has 74.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M6000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000 is a workstation card while FirePro M6000 is a mobile workstation 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 M2000
Quadro M2000
AMD FirePro M6000
FirePro M6000

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
216 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5
15 votes

Rate FirePro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2000 or FirePro M6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.