Radeon HD 6870 vs Quadro P6000

Place in the ranking	107	601
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.15	1.00
Power efficiency	11.04	2.62
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GP102	Barts
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	1 October 2016 (8 years ago)	21 October 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$5,999	$239

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P6000 has 315% better value for money than HD 6870.

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 cores	3840	1120
Core clock speed	1506 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1645 MHz	900 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	151 Watt
Texture fill rate	394.8	50.40
Floating-point processing power	12.63 TFLOPS	2.016 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	32
TMUs	240	56

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 support	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	267 mm	220 mm
Width	2" (5.1 cm)	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 8-pin	2x 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 type	384 Bit	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1127 MHz	1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 432 GB/s	134.4 GB/s
Shared memory	no 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
Multi-display synchronization	Quadro Sync II	no data
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	-	+
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.

DirectX	12	DirectX® 11
Shader Model	6.4	5.0
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
CUDA	6.1	-

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 40.00
+597%

HD 6870 5.74

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 15381
+596%

HD 6870 2209

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:

900p	400−450 +556%	61 −556%
Full HD	400−450 +535%	63 −535%
1200p	270−280 +592%	39 −592%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

15.00
−295%

3.79

+295%

HD 6870 has 295% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Fortnite	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
World of Tanks	189 +0%	189 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Elden Ring	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
World of Tanks	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Fortnite	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how Quadro P6000 and HD 6870 compete in popular games:

Quadro P6000 is 556% faster in 900p
Quadro P6000 is 535% faster in 1080p
Quadro P6000 is 592% faster in 1200p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	40.00	5.74
Recency	1 October 2016	21 October 2010
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	151 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 596.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6870, on the other hand, has 65.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6870 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P6000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6870 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.