RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs Quadro

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro and RTX 6000 Ada Generation, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro
1999
32 MB SDR
2.46

RTX 6000 Ada Generation outperforms by a whopping 2867% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking83716
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data7.19
Power efficiencyno data16.75
ArchitectureCelsius (1999−2005)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNV10AD102
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date1999 (26 years ago)3 December 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,799

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 coresno data18176
Core clock speed135 MHz915 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2505 MHz
Number of transistors17 million76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology220 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data300 Watt
Texture fill rate0.541,423
Floating-point processing powerno data91.06 TFLOPS
ROPs4192
TMUs4568
Tensor Coresno data568
Ray Tracing Coresno data142

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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 16-pin

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 typeSDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 MB48 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed166 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth2.656 GB/s960.0 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 VGA4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX7.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGL1.24.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9

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 2.46
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 73.00
+2867%

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 947
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 28066
+2864%

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 HD6−7
−3050%
189
+3050%
1440p5−6
−3060%
158
+3060%
4K3−4
−3833%
118
+3833%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data35.97
1440pno data43.03
4Kno data57.62

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 164
+0%
164
+0%
Elden Ring 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 163
+0%
163
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
Metro Exodus 113
+0%
113
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 155
+0%
155
+0%
Dota 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Elden Ring 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Far Cry 5 123
+0%
123
+0%
Fortnite 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 106
+0%
106
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 147
+0%
147
+0%
Far Cry 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Elden Ring 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
World of Tanks 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 131
+0%
131
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Metro Exodus 99
+0%
99
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 219
+0%
219
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Dota 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Elden Ring 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 90
+0%
90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

This is how Quadro and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 3050% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 3060% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 3833% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.46 73.00
Maximum RAM amount 32 MB 48 GB
Chip lithography 220 nm 5 nm

RTX 6000 Ada Generation has a 2867.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 153500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 4300% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 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
Quadro
NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation
RTX 6000 Ada Generation

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.


3.4 10 votes

Rate Quadro on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 98 votes

Rate RTX 6000 Ada Generation 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.