AMD Radeon RX 7700 vs NVIDIA Quadro K6000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 106,028 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 scores 23,749 points. The delta is -77.6 percent, meaning the AMD card finishes roughly four and a half times ahead of the older NVIDIA workstation card in this compute-oriented test. The margin is not close; it is a full generational and architectural gap expressed in raw numbers.

The Quadro K6000's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 19,030, which places it at the 63rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6600 at 19,036 (0 percent delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile at 19,049 (-0.1 percent), the NVIDIA Tesla K20m at 19,089 (-0.3 percent), and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation at 18,954 (0.4 percent). The K6000 is essentially in a dead heat with those cards, all within a fraction of a percent of each other, which indicates that its compute performance sits in a well-populated mid-range band.

The Radeon RX 7700, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 15,852, which places it at the 58th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 370X at 15,862 (-0.1 percent), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 at 16,014 (-1 percent), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 15,679 (1.1 percent), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti at 16,129 (-1.7 percent). Interestingly, the RX 7700's average score is lower than the K6000's average, despite the RX 7700's overwhelming win in the single shared OpenCL test. This discrepancy is explained by the different test suites: the RX 7700's benchmarks include a broader set of Passmark tests (DirectX 9 through 12, G2D, G3D, and compute) and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result, while the K6000 only has Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan results. The RX 7700's Passmark DirectX scores are modest (92 in DirectX 10, 186 in DirectX 11, 96 in DirectX 12, 261 in DirectX 9), which drags its average down relative to its OpenCL peak.

The single head-to-head result is clear: the RX 7700 dominates in OpenCL compute. The Quadro K6000's other benchmarks (Geekbench Metal at 7,932 and Geekbench Vulkan at 25,409) do not have corresponding RX 7700 results, so the database records zero wins for the Quadro and one win for the RX 7700. The data does not show any test where the K6000 beats the RX 7700.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the stronger compute performer in the single recorded comparison. Its OpenCL score of 106,028 versus the K6000's 23,749 is a 77.6 percent margin in favor of the AMD card. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute, the RX 7700 is the obvious choice based on these measurements.

The Quadro K6000, however, holds its own in the broader database ranking. Its 63rd percentile placement and average score of 19,030 are higher than the RX 7700's 58th percentile and 15,852 average. That means the K6000 performs better across the entire set of tests recorded for it, but those tests are different from the RX 7700's test set. The K6000's Vulkan score of 25,409 and Metal score of 7,932 are not matched by any RX 7700 result, so no direct comparison exists for those APIs.

For a user choosing strictly from the recorded data, the RX 7700 wins the only head-to-head test and delivers a massive OpenCL advantage. The K6000 is a legacy part (end-of-life production status, released in 2013) that still competes in average score terms, but its single shared benchmark shows it cannot keep pace with the modern RDNA 3.0 card. The RX 7700 is the recommended pick for compute-bound tasks; the K6000 remains relevant only for workloads that specifically use its older API set (DirectX 11_1, Vulkan 1.2.175) where no RX 7700 data exists.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and completely different design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro K6000 uses the GK110B chip, built on the Kepler architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The die measures 561 mm² and contains 7,080 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 chip, based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, also manufactured by TSMC but on a 5 nm process. Its die is smaller at 346 mm² but packs 28,100 million transistors, for a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The density difference is stark: the RX 7700 crams nearly 6.5 times more transistors per area into a smaller die.

Clock speeds reflect the process node gap. The K6000 runs at a base clock of 797 MHz and a boost of 902 MHz, with memory at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The RX 7700 operates at a base of 1900 MHz, a boost of 2459 MHz, and a game clock of 2041 MHz, with memory at 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective). The RX 7700's boost clock is more than 2.7 times the K6000's base clock.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The K6000 has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 624.1 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the RX 7700 more than doubles the bandwidth thanks to faster memory.

The compute resources differ in kind. The K6000 has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units, with no ray tracing or tensor cores. The RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. The RX 7700 has fewer shaders but more ROPs, and it adds hardware ray tracing support that the Kepler part lacks entirely.

Theoretical throughput numbers confirm the generational leap. The K6000 delivers 5.196 TFLOPS FP32, with a pixel rate of 54.12 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 216.5 GTexel/s. The RX 7700 delivers 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 (and 25.18 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio), with a pixel rate of 236.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 393.4 GTexel/s. The RX 7700 is roughly 4.8 times faster in FP32, 4.4 times faster in pixel rate, and 1.8 times faster in texture rate.

Power and interface specifications also diverge. The K6000 has a TDP of 225 W, uses dual-slot cooling with 2x 6-pin power connectors, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The RX 7700 has a lower TDP of 200 W, also dual-slot, but uses 2x 8-pin connectors and the same 550 W PSU suggestion. The K6000 runs on PCIe 3.0 x16, while the RX 7700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs differ: the K6000 offers 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the RX 7700 offers 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only shared benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 106,028 versus the NVIDIA Quadro K6000's 23,749, a delta of -77.6 percent in favor of the RX 7700.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The K6000 has a higher average score of 19,030 (63rd percentile), while the RX 7700 averages 15,852 (58th percentile). However, these averages come from different test sets, so they are not directly comparable.

Q: What memory configurations do the two cards use?

A: The K6000 uses 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do the cards support ray tracing?

A: The RX 7700 has 40 ray tracing cores; the K6000 has no ray tracing cores at all.

Q: What are their production statuses?

A: The K6000 is end-of-life and was released in 2013. The RX 7700 is active and was released in 2025.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The RX 7700 delivers 25.18 TFLOPS FP32, while the K6000 delivers 5.196 TFLOPS FP32, a roughly 4.8-fold advantage for the RX 7700.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7700 wins the only direct comparison, and it wins by a massive margin in OpenCL compute. Its 106,028 score versus the K6000's 23,749 indicates that any OpenCL-based workload (general compute, physics simulations, some rendering tasks) will run dramatically faster on the AMD card. The RX 7700 also benefits from a much newer feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the K6000's DirectX 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.175, plus ray tracing hardware. Its higher pixel rate (236.1 GPixel/s) and texture rate (393.4 GTexel/s) give it advantages in rasterization-heavy scenarios, assuming the software can use those features.

The K6000's wins are more contextual. It has a higher average benchmark score (19,030) and a higher percentile rank (63rd versus 58th), but that is an artifact of the different test suites rather than a direct performance advantage. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 25,409 is the second-highest number recorded for the card, and its Metal score of 7,932 shows some compute capability on Apple platforms, but no RX 7700 counterpart exists for these tests. The K6000 also supports 2x DVI outputs, which may matter for legacy display setups, and it uses PCIe 3.0, which is compatible with older motherboards. For a user with a Kepler-era workstation and a need for DVI connectivity, the K6000 could still serve, but the data does not show any test where it beats the RX 7700.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K6000 | AMD Radeon RX 7700 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 28,100 million |

| Die size | 561 mm² | 346 mm² |

| Transistor density | 12.6M / mm² | 81.2M / mm² |

| Base clock | 797 MHz | 1900 MHz |

| Boost clock | 902 MHz | 2459 MHz |

| Game clock | Not applicable | 2041 MHz |

| Memory size | 12 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 384 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 624.1 GB/s |

| Memory clock | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) |

| Shading units | 2,880 | 2,560 |

| TMUs | 240 | 160 |

| ROPs | 48 | 96 |

| Ray tracing cores | None | 40 |

| Pixel rate | 54.12 GPixel/s | 236.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 216.5 GTexel/s | 393.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.196 TFLOPS | 25.18 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not specified | 25.18 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 225 W | 200 W |

| Power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 2x 8-pin |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C |

| DirectX support | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2013-07-22 | 2025-09-17 |

| Launch MSRP | 5,265 USD | Not specified |

The two cards differ in every major architectural category. The RX 7700 is smaller, denser, faster in clock speed, wider in memory bandwidth, higher in pixel and texture throughput, and more than quadruple the FP32 compute. The K6000 has more shading units and TMUs (2,880 versus 2,560 and 240 versus 160, respectively), but those advantages do not translate into a win in the recorded benchmark. The K6000's 384-bit memory bus is wider than the RX 7700's 256-bit bus, but the RX 7700's GDDR6 at 19.5 Gbps effective more than compensates. The RX 7700 also adds ray tracing cores, a feature the Kepler architecture cannot support. The K6000's only unique advantages are its dual DVI outputs and its lower PCIe generation requirement, which are legacy compatibility features rather than performance assets.