AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs NVIDIA Quadro K6000 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear generational divide. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 dominates the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 in every recorded head-to-head test, with wins in all three shared benchmarks. The RX 5700’s average benchmark score of 22,170 places it 16.5% ahead of the Quadro K6000’s 19,030. The AMD card also sits higher in the overall GPU percentile ranking, at 67 versus the NVIDIA card’s 63.

For users prioritizing raw compute performance, modern API support, and higher frame rates in DirectX-based workloads, the RX 5700 is the obvious pick. Its nearest rivals in the database, such as the AMD Radeon RX 6700S with an average score of 22,154, confirm it sits in a competitive mid-range tier. The Quadro K6000, meanwhile, aligns with much lower-performing parts like the AMD Radeon RX 6600, which scores 19,036, a delta of just 0%. This suggests the K6000’s performance class is closer to entry-level modern cards than to the RX 5700.

The Quadro K6000’s only potential advantage lies in its larger 12 GB memory pool and its historical positioning as a workstation card, but the recorded data shows no benchmark where this translates into a win. The verdict is straightforward: for any task measured here, the RX 5700 is the faster and more future-proof option.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 uses the Navi 10 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It packs 10,300 million transistors into a die size of 251 mm², yielding a transistor density of 41.0M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 uses the GK110B chip with Kepler architecture, built on a much older 28 nm process, also at TSMC. Its 7,080 million transistors occupy a significantly larger die of 561 mm², resulting in a density of just 12.6M per mm².

The RX 5700 features 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The K6000 has more shading units at 2880 and more TMUs at 240, but fewer ROPs at 48. Despite having fewer shading units, the RX 5700 achieves far higher clock speeds: a base of 1465 MHz and boost of 1725 MHz, compared to the K6000’s 797 MHz base and 902 MHz boost. This clock advantage is the primary driver of the RX 5700’s superior compute throughput.

Memory configurations also differ sharply. The RX 5700 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 14 Gbps. The K6000 offers 12 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, but its bandwidth is only 288.4 GB/s due to the slower 6 Gbps effective memory speed. While the K6000 has more capacity, the RX 5700 has 55.3% more bandwidth, which matters more for the benchmarks recorded.

Other differences include the bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 on the RX 5700 versus PCIe 3.0 x16 on the K6000. API support also diverges, with the RX 5700 supporting DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the K6000 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RX 5700 also supports FP16 at 15.90 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the K6000 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The shared benchmark suite between these two cards consists of three Geekbench tests, and the RX 5700 wins all of them by substantial margins. The largest gap appears in Geekbench Metal, where the RX 5700 scores 86,079 against the K6000’s 7,932. This is a delta of 985.2%, meaning the AMD card delivers nearly ten times the Metal performance. This result is particularly striking given that Metal is a low-level API, and the RX 5700’s modern architecture clearly extracts far more efficiency from it.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5700 scores 69,603, while the K6000 manages 23,749. The delta here is 193.1%, meaning the RX 5700 is roughly three times faster in this compute-oriented test. This aligns with the FP32 figures: the RX 5700 delivers 7.949 TFLOPS versus the K6000’s 5.196 TFLOPS, a 53% advantage in raw shader throughput. The clock speed difference, 1725 MHz boost versus 902 MHz boost, more than compensates for the K6000’s higher shading unit count.

The closest contest is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 5700 scores 64,166 and the K6000 scores 25,409, a delta of 152.5%. Even here, the AMD card is two and a half times faster. The K6000’s lack of modern Vulkan optimizations, given its older API version of 1.2.175, likely contributes to this gap. Across all three tests, the RX 5700’s wins are not marginal; they are categorical.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 has an average benchmark score of 22,170, while the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 scores 19,030. This places the RX 5700 16.5% higher overall.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench Metal performance?

A: The RX 5700 scores 86,079 in Geekbench Metal, while the K6000 scores 7,932. This gives the AMD card a 985.2% advantage, its largest margin in any shared test.

Q: Does the Quadro K6000 have more memory than the RX 5700?

A: Yes, the K6000 has 12 GB of GDDR5 memory, compared to the RX 5700’s 8 GB of GDDR6. However, the RX 5700 has higher bandwidth at 448.0 GB/s versus 288.4 GB/s.

Q: Which card supports a newer PCIe interface?

A: The RX 5700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the K6000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. This gives the AMD card double the per-lane bandwidth for data transfer.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The RX 5700’s Navi 10 chip has a density of 41.0M transistors per mm² at 7 nm, while the K6000’s GK110B chip has 12.6M per mm² at 28 nm. This reflects the much newer manufacturing process of the AMD card.

Q: How many shading units does each card have?

A: The K6000 has 2,880 shading units, while the RX 5700 has 2,304. Despite having fewer units, the RX 5700 achieves higher FP32 throughput due to its significantly higher clock speeds.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 wins in every category where the two cards have shared benchmark data. Its advantages span compute (OpenCL), graphics APIs (Vulkan), and Apple’s Metal framework. The RX 5700’s 7.949 TFLOPS FP32 performance, combined with its 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, makes it suited for gaming, real-time graphics, and general-purpose compute tasks. Its modern RDNA 1.0 architecture also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, making it compatible with current and near-future software.

The NVIDIA Quadro K6000’s only recorded strengths are its larger 12 GB memory capacity and its higher shading unit count of 2,880. These features could theoretically benefit workloads that require large datasets in memory, but no benchmark in the database shows this translating into a performance win. The K6000’s 5.196 TFLOPS FP32 is lower, its 288.4 GB/s bandwidth is lower, and its API support is older. For any measured metric, the RX 5700 is the superior choice.

In practical terms, the RX 5700 is for users who need speed, modern feature support, and efficiency. The K6000 is a legacy product whose 12 GB capacity might still appeal to niche compute scenarios, but the data does not support choosing it for performance reasons.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The process node is 7 nm for the RX 5700 versus 28 nm for the K6000, with transistor counts of 10,300 million versus 7,080 million, and die sizes of 251 mm² versus 561 mm². The RX 5700 has a base clock of 1465 MHz and boost of 1725 MHz, while the K6000 runs at 797 MHz base and 902 MHz boost.

Memory specifications show the RX 5700 with 8 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus at 448.0 GB/s, while the K6000 has 12 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus at 288.4 GB/s. The shading units are 2,304 for the RX 5700 and 2,880 for the K6000. TMUs are 144 versus 240, and ROPs are 64 versus 48. Pixel rate is 110.4 GPixel/s for the RX 5700 versus 54.12 GPixel/s for the K6000. Texture rate is 248.4 GTexel/s versus 216.5 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 7.949 TFLOPS versus 5.196 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 15.90 TFLOPS for the RX 5700, with no FP16 recorded for the K6000.

Power draw differs as well: the RX 5700 is rated at 180 W, while the K6000 draws 225 W. The RX 5700 uses a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector setup, while the K6000 uses 2x 6-pin. Suggested PSU is 450 W for the AMD card and 550 W for the NVIDIA card. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 5700, versus 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 for the K6000. Dimensions are nearly identical in length and height, but the RX 5700 has a width of 36 mm, while the K6000’s width is not recorded. The RX 5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the K6000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.