AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB Comparison

# The Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is the clear performance winner in every head-to-head benchmark, but the AMD Radeon Pro 575 is not without its own strengths. The data shows the Quadro M6000 24 GB leads by 15.9% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 22.6% in Geekbench Vulkan, making it the default choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its average benchmark score of 43,262 places it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 575's average of 39,555 sits at the 82nd percentile.

However, the Radeon Pro 575 has a decisive advantage in form factor and power efficiency. It is an MXM module with no power connectors and a 150 W TDP, compared to the Quadro M6000 24 GB's dual-slot design with a single 8-pin connector and 250 W TDP. For systems that require a compact, self-contained GPU — particularly portable or all-in-one Mac systems — the Radeon Pro 575 is the only viable option. The Quadro M6000 24 GB also carries a launch MSRP of 4,999 USD, which is absent for the Radeon Pro 575.

Practical verdict: choose the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB if maximum raw compute performance and the 24 GB frame buffer are non-negotiable. Choose the AMD Radeon Pro 575 if the GPU must fit into an MXM slot, require less power, or if the system is a Mac where the Radeon Pro 575's Geekbench Metal score of 46,192 is relevant.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural eras. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB uses the GM200 chip built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 8,000 million transistors across a 601 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.3M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro 575 uses the Ellesmere chip based on GCN 4.0, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 5,700 million transistors on a much smaller 232 mm² die, achieving a higher transistor density of 24.6M per mm².

The Quadro M6000 24 GB features 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, enabling a pixel rate of 106.9 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 213.9 GTexel/s. Its FP32 compute is rated at 6.844 TFLOPS. The Radeon Pro 575 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a pixel rate of 35.07 GPixel/s and texture rate of 140.3 GTexel/s. Its FP32 is 4.489 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance at the same 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

Memory architecture differs significantly. The Quadro M6000 24 GB uses 24 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 317.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 217.0 GB/s. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16 interfaces, but the Quadro M6000 24 GB supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 575 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Quadro M6000 24 GB was released on 2016-03-04, while the Radeon Pro 575 came later on 2017-06-04. The NVIDIA part is part of the Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) generation, succeeding Quadro Kepler and preceding Quadro Pascal. The AMD part belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) generation.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is significantly faster. It scores 40,098 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the AMD Radeon Pro 575's 34,596, a 15.9% advantage. In Vulkan, the lead grows to 22.6% (46,425 vs 37,878).

Q: Is the AMD Radeon Pro 575 competitive in any benchmark?

A: The Radeon Pro 575 has one unique benchmark result: a Geekbench Metal score of 46,192. The Quadro M6000 24 GB has no Metal benchmark listed. For Mac-based Metal workloads, the Radeon Pro 575 is the relevant choice.

Q: How do their memory capacities compare?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 317.4 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro offers six times the capacity and roughly 46% more bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has a 150 W TDP with no power connectors, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has a 250 W TDP requiring a single 8-pin connector. The Radeon Pro 575 also comes as an MXM Module, whereas the Quadro is a dual-slot card.

Q: What are their relative positions in the overall GPU landscape?

A: The Quadro M6000 24 GB sits at the 83rd percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 43,262, closely matching the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43,268, 0% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223, 0.1% delta). The Radeon Pro 575 is at the 82nd percentile with an average of 39,555, near the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39,568, 0% delta) and AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063, -1.3% delta).

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB | AMD Radeon Pro 575 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 601 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.3M / mm² | 24.6M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 192 | 128 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 106.9 GPixel/s | 35.07 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 213.9 GTexel/s | 140.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 6.844 TFLOPS | 4.489 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 317.4 GB/s | 217.0 GB/s |

| TDP | 250 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | Not listed |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2016-03-04 | 2017-06-04 |

| Launch MSRP | 4,999 USD | Not listed |

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are decisive in favor of the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro scores 40,098 against the Radeon Pro 575's 34,596, a 15.9% lead. This reflects the Quadro's substantially higher shading unit count (3,072 vs 2,048), higher FP32 throughput (6.844 TFLOPS vs 4.489 TFLOPS), and wider memory bus.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further. The Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 46,425 versus the Radeon Pro 575's 37,878, a 22.6% advantage. This larger delta suggests the Maxwell 2.0 architecture's Vulkan implementation (version 1.4) handles the workload more efficiently than GCN 4.0's Vulkan 1.3 support. The Quadro's higher pixel rate (106.9 GPixel/s vs 35.07 GPixel/s) and texture rate (213.9 GTexel/s vs 140.3 GTexel/s) likely contribute to this outcome.

The Radeon Pro 575's only unique benchmark win is Geekbench Metal at 46,192, but no comparable Metal score exists for the Quadro M6000 24 GB, so this cannot be directly compared. The overall win count is 2-0 in favor of the NVIDIA part.

# Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB wins in every directly comparable benchmark category. Its 15.9% OpenCL lead and 22.6% Vulkan lead make it the superior choice for general GPU compute, OpenCL acceleration, and Vulkan-based applications. The 24 GB frame buffer is six times larger than the Radeon Pro 575's 4 GB, making it dramatically better suited for large datasets, high-resolution textures, or multi-display professional workloads. Its 317.4 GB/s bandwidth versus the Radeon's 217.0 GB/s further reinforces this advantage. The Quadro also supports the newer Vulkan 1.4 API and DirectX 12 (12_1) feature level.

The AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins in the categories that matter for specific system integration. Its MXM Module form factor with no external power connectors makes it installable in portable or compact systems where the Quadro's dual-slot, 8-pin-requiring design is physically impossible. Its 150 W TDP versus 250 W means lower system power draw and heat output. For Mac environments, the Radeon Pro 575's Geekbench Metal score of 46,192 is the only relevant data point — the Quadro M6000 24 GB has no Metal benchmark listed. The Radeon Pro 575 also offers FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, a feature not listed for the Quadro. Its release date of 2017-06-04 makes it a newer product, though both are now end-of-life.

In summary: the Quadro M6000 24 GB is the compute and graphics performance king, while the Radeon Pro 575 is the integration-flexible, power-conscious option for Mac or MXM-based systems.