FirePro V3900 vs Quadro P6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P6000 and FirePro V3900, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P6000
2016
24 GB 384-bit, 250 Watt
39.67
+2290%

P6000 outperforms V3900 by a whopping 2290% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking106939
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.86no data
Power efficiency10.992.30
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGP102Turks
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)7 February 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 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 cores3840480
Core clock speed1506 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1645 MHzno data
Number of transistors11,800 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt199 Watt
Texture fill rate394.815.60
Floating-point processing power12.63 TFLOPS0.624 TFLOPS
ROPs968
TMUs24024

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).

Bus supportno dataPCIe 2.1 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm168 mm
Width2" (5.1 cm)1-slot
Form factorno datahalf height / half length
Supplementary power connectors1 x 8-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 type384 BitGDDR3
Maximum RAM amount24 GB1 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 432 GB/s28 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Sync IIno data
DisplayPort countno data1
Dual-link DVI support-+
HD сomponent video output-+

Supported technologies

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

ECC (Error Correcting Code)+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
High-Performance Video I/O6+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA6.1-

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 P6000 39.67
+2290%
FirePro V3900 1.66

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 P6000 15307
+2292%
FirePro V3900 640

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 P6000 64226
+4007%
FirePro V3900 1564

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 39.67 1.66
Recency 1 October 2016 7 February 2012
Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 199 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 2289.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.

FirePro V3900, on the other hand, has 25.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro V3900 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 P6000
Quadro P6000
AMD FirePro V3900
FirePro V3900

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.


3.6 89 votes

Rate Quadro P6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 94 votes

Rate FirePro V3900 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.