Quadro P600 vs Quadro RTX 4000

Place in the ranking	110	500
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	36.82	6.62
Power efficiency	17.06	14.82
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	TU104	GP107
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	13 November 2018 (6 years ago)	7 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$899	$178

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 4000 has 456% better value for money than Quadro P600.

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	2304	384
Core clock speed	1005 MHz	1430 MHz
Boost clock speed	1545 MHz	1620 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	222.5	38.88
Floating-point processing power	7.119 TFLOPS	1.244 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	144	24
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	36	no data

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	145 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	None

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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	1252 MHz
Memory bandwidth	416.0 GB/s	80.13 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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

3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	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.

RTX 4000 39.65
+361%

Quadro P600 8.61

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.

RTX 4000 15245
+360%

Quadro P600 3311

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.

RTX 4000 85828
+710%

Quadro P600 10593

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

RTX 4000 78829
+709%

Quadro P600 9744

GeekBench 5 CUDA

RTX 4000 94250
+786%

Quadro P600 10634

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 HD

160−170
+344%

−344%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

5.62
−13.6%

4.94

+13.6%

Quadro P600 has 14% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	27 +0%	27 +0%
Elden Ring	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Fortnite	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	95 +0%	95 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	72 +0%	72 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Elden Ring	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
World of Tanks	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Fortnite	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

This is how RTX 4000 and Quadro P600 compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 is 344% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.65	8.61
Recency	13 November 2018	7 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	160 Watt	40 Watt

RTX 4000 has a 360.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro P600, on the other hand, has 300% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P600 in performance tests.

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