Quadro P4000 vs Quadro P6000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P6000 and Quadro P4000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P6000
2016
24 GB 384-bit, 250 Watt
39.68
+31.7%

P6000 outperforms P4000 by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking108185
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.8617.22
Power efficiency11.0620.00
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGP102GP104
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)6 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$5,999 $815

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P4000 has 346% better value for money than Quadro P6000.

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 cores38401792
Core clock speed1506 MHz1202 MHz
Boost clock speed1645 MHz1480 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate394.8165.8
Floating-point processing power12.63 TFLOPS5.304 TFLOPS
ROPs9664
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 mm241 mm
Width2" (5.1 cm)1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin
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 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount24 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz1901 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 432 GB/s192 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
Multi-display synchronizationQuadro Sync IIno data
Display Portno data1.4

Supported technologies

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

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA6.16.1

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 39.68
+31.7%
Quadro P4000 30.13

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
+31.7%
Quadro P4000 11624

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
+54.4%
Quadro P4000 41604

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 P6000 77200
+82.6%
Quadro P4000 42273

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 P6000 47462
+23%
Quadro P4000 38590

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:

Full HD90−95
+26.8%
71
−26.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p66.6611.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Hitman 3 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Hitman 3 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Hitman 3 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+0%
41
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hitman 3 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how Quadro P6000 and Quadro P4000 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P6000 is 27% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.68 30.13
Recency 1 October 2016 6 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 24 GB 8 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 100 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 31.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro P4000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P4000 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
NVIDIA Quadro P4000
Quadro P4000

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
4 292 votes

Rate Quadro P4000 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.