AMD Radeon RX 5600M vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB Comparison

The benchmark data places the AMD Radeon RX 5600M clearly ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB in the two shared tests, with the most significant margin coming in OpenCL compute workloads. The RX 5600M delivers a 48.6% higher Geekbench OpenCL score, while its Vulkan advantage is a narrower 5.2%. Despite the Quadro’s larger memory pool and higher raw shader count, the newer RDNA architecture translates into superior real-world benchmark performance in these metrics.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the decisive battleground between these two cards, and the result is emphatic. The AMD Radeon RX 5600M scores 59,589 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB manages only 40,098 points. That is a delta of 48.6%, meaning the mobile AMD part outperforms the workstation-class NVIDIA card by nearly half in this compute-heavy workload. This result is particularly striking given the Quadro’s specifications — 3,072 shading units versus the RX 5600M’s 2,304, and a higher FP32 throughput of 6.844 TFLOPS compared to 5.829 TFLOPS. The data indicates that architectural efficiency, not raw resource counts, drives the outcome.

In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the RX 5600M again comes out on top, scoring 48,843 against the Quadro’s 46,425. The 5.2% delta is far more modest than the OpenCL gap, suggesting that both GPUs handle graphics API workloads more comparably. Still, the AMD card wins outright, extending its clean sweep to 2-0 in head-to-head matchups. The Vulkan result shows the RX 5600M holding a consistent edge, though the Quadro’s Maxwell architecture is not completely outclassed in this API.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the same hierarchy. The RX 5600M posts an average of 46,601 across its benchmark suite, which includes the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test (1,320 points) and a Geekbench Metal score of 76,653. The Quadro M6000 24 GB averages 43,262, based solely on its two Geekbench results. This 7.7% gap in average score (46,601 vs. 43,262) confirms that the RX 5600M’s wins are not isolated anomalies but reflect a broader performance advantage.

Looking at percentile rankings, the RX 5600M sits in the 85th percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB occupies the 83rd percentile. This two-percentile difference aligns with the benchmark deltas, placing the AMD card slightly higher in the overall performance distribution. The nearest rivals for each card further contextualize these positions: the RX 5600M trades blows with the Intel Arc A530M (46,614 average, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 6550M (46,702, -0.2%), while the Quadro M6000 24 GB sits alongside the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43,268, 0%) and the RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223, 0.1%). These peer groupings show that both cards are competitive within their respective performance tiers, but the RX 5600M’s tier is simply higher.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5600M is the faster GPU in every shared benchmark. For users prioritizing compute performance, particularly in OpenCL-heavy applications, the RX 5600M delivers a 48.6% advantage that cannot be overlooked. The Quadro M6000 24 GB’s larger VRAM capacity does not compensate for this deficit in the tested workloads.

The RX 5600M is the pick for anyone running OpenCL-based tasks, given its massive lead. It also holds the edge in Vulkan graphics, making it the better all-round performer for gaming or general GPU compute. The Quadro M6000 24 GB, however, remains relevant for specific use cases: its 24 GB of GDDR5 memory is four times the RX 5600M’s 6 GB, which could matter for datasets that exceed the smaller card’s capacity. The Quadro’s 384-bit memory bus also provides higher peak bandwidth at 317.4 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s for the RX 5600M, though this does not translate into a benchmark win.

The Quadro M6000 24 GB is also a dual-slot desktop card with 1x 8-pin power connector and a 600 W suggested PSU, whereas the RX 5600M is an integrated mobile part (IGP) with no power connectors. These form-factor differences are critical: the RX 5600M is designed for laptops, while the Quadro is a workstation desktop card. The choice between them is not just performance — it is platform compatibility.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600M wins decisively, scoring 59,589 versus the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 40,098, a 48.6% advantage.

Q: Is there any test where the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB beats the RX 5600M?

A: No. In the two shared benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RX 5600M wins both. The head-to-head record is 2 wins for AMD and 0 for NVIDIA.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 5600M averages 46,601 across its benchmark set, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB averages 43,262. The RX 5600M’s average is approximately 7.7% higher.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600M has 6 GB of GDDR6. The Quadro’s memory is four times larger.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths differ?

A: The Quadro M6000 24 GB achieves 317.4 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the RX 5600M delivers 288.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus. The Quadro has higher peak bandwidth.

Q: What are their percentile rankings among all GPUs?

A: The RX 5600M ranks in the 85th percentile, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB ranks in the 83rd percentile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially in core configuration. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB carries 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, compared to the RX 5600M’s 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This gives the Quadro higher theoretical peak rates: 106.9 GPixel/s pixel fill and 213.9 GTexel/s texture fill, versus 80.96 GPixel/s and 182.2 GTexel/s for the AMD card. FP32 compute also favors the Quadro at 6.844 TFLOPS versus 5.829 TFLOPS, though the RX 5600M supports FP16 at 11.66 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) while the Quadro has no listed FP16 capability.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The RX 5600M runs at a 1035 MHz base and 1265 MHz boost, with a 1190 MHz game clock, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB operates at 988 MHz base and 1114 MHz boost. The AMD card’s higher clocks partially offset its lower shader count. Memory configurations also diverge: the RX 5600M uses 6 GB of GDDR6 at 12 Gbps effective, while the Quadro uses 24 GB of GDDR5 at 6.6 Gbps effective. The bus widths differ as well (192-bit for AMD, 384-bit for NVIDIA), resulting in the bandwidth figures noted earlier.

Power and physical specs are starkly different. The RX 5600M has a 150 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, suitable for mobile devices. The Quadro M6000 24 GB draws 250 W, is dual-slot, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, and has a 600 W suggested PSU. Its dimensions are 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height. The RX 5600M’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the Quadro offers 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2. The RX 5600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, whereas the Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The AMD Radeon RX 5600M is built on RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM200 chip, on a 28 nm process. This process gap is immense: 7 nm versus 28 nm, leading to vastly different transistor densities. The RX 5600M packs 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die, yielding a density of 41.0M transistors per mm². The Quadro houses 8,000 million transistors on a 601 mm² die, with a density of just 13.3M per mm². The RX 5600M achieves over three times the transistor density.

Neither GPU has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so those features are absent from both. The RX 5600M’s RDNA 1.0 architecture introduces improvements over the older GCN-based designs, which is reflected in its superior benchmark efficiency. The Quadro’s Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while competent, is from an older era. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The RX 5600M also supports FP16 compute at a 2:1 ratio, a feature the Quadro lacks entirely.

Release timing reinforces the generational gap. The RX 5600M launched on 2020-07-06, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB launched on 2016-03-04. The Quadro is also explicitly noted as having a predecessor (Quadro Kepler) and successor (Quadro Pascal), while the RX 5600M’s predecessor is Polaris Mobile with no listed successor. Both are end-of-life products, but the RX 5600M is four years newer.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 5600M wins in every benchmark category where both cards were tested. Its 48.6% OpenCL advantage makes it the clear choice for compute workloads that utilize this API, such as general-purpose GPU computing, physics simulations, or OpenCL-accelerated rendering. The 5.2% Vulkan win extends this to modern graphics APIs, covering gaming and Vulkan-based applications. The RX 5600M’s higher clocks (1265 MHz boost vs. 1114 MHz) and newer architecture deliver better performance-per-clock and per-watt in the data.

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. With 24 GB of GDDR5 and 317.4 GB/s bandwidth, it offers four times the VRAM of the RX 5600M. This makes it suitable for workloads with massive memory footprints that exceed 6 GB, such as large dataset processing, high-resolution texture loading, or multi-display setups. The Quadro’s 384-bit memory bus provides a theoretical bandwidth advantage of roughly 10% over the RX 5600M, which could benefit memory-bound tasks despite the lower compute scores.

For a mobile user, the RX 5600M is the only choice — it is an IGP with no power connectors, designed for laptops. The Quadro M6000 24 GB is a desktop workstation card requiring a dual-slot chassis and 600 W PSU. The use case splits cleanly: the RX 5600M for portable, compute-efficient workloads; the Quadro for stationary, memory-hungry professional tasks. Benchmark results, however, consistently favor the RX 5600M in raw performance, making it the stronger GPU wherever memory size is not the limiting factor.