AMD Radeon RX 9060 vs NVIDIA Quadro K6000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data contains only two shared benchmarks, and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 wins both decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 9060 scores 88,183 against the Quadro K6000’s 23,749, a margin of 73.1% in AMD’s favor. That is not a close contest; it is a generational gap in raw compute throughput. The RX 9060’s FP32 rating of 21.43 TFLOPS versus the K6000’s 5.196 TFLOPS explains the scale of the OpenCL gap, though the benchmark delta is even larger than the theoretical peak would suggest, indicating efficiency gains beyond raw clock speed.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 9060 posts 39,476 versus 25,409 for the Quadro, a 35.6% advantage. Vulkan is a modern API the Kepler architecture was never designed for, and the results reflect that. The K6000 supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the RX 9060 supports Vulkan 1.4, and the newer API overhead model benefits the RDNA 4.0 part substantially. The Quadro’s older driver path and lack of hardware features for low-level API execution hold it back even in a workload where both GPUs can run.

The K6000 does not win any head-to-head benchmark in the database. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 19,030, which sits 15.9% above the RX 9060’s 16,014 average, but that aggregate figure is misleading. The Quadro’s average is buoyed by its Geekbench scores, while the RX 9060’s average is dragged down by a series of Passmark results that appear to be from a different test methodology or driver state. Look at the Passmark DirectX 10 score of 104 for the RX 9060 versus its DirectX 11 score of 182, and the DirectX 12 score of just 44; these are anomalously low for a GPU with 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. The Passmark G3D score of 17,631 and GPU Compute score of 9,919 are more consistent with the RX 9060’s other results, but the DirectX sub-scores are outliers that skew the average downward.

When comparing each card to its nearest rivals in the database, the picture sharpens. The Quadro K6000’s average score of 19,030 puts it within 0.1% of the GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19,049) and essentially tied with the Radeon RX 6600 (19,036). It sits 0.3% above the Tesla K20m (19,089) and 0.4% below the RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18,954). The K6000 is therefore in a tight cluster of mid-range performers from multiple generations, despite being a 2013 flagship. The RX 9060’s 16,014 average places it 0.7% below the RTX 3060 Ti (16,129), 1% above the R9 370X (15,862) and RX 7700 (15,852), and 2.1% above the Pro W5500 (15,679). That puts the RX 9060 in a similar performance bracket to a card released several years earlier, which is a surprising result for a 2025 product until you account for the Passmark outliers.

The percentile rankings reinforce the gap. The K6000 sits at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile. Despite the RX 9060’s massive OpenCL win, its overall standing is lower, which suggests the K6000’s consistency across a wider range of legacy and professional workloads gives it a broader appeal in the aggregate. But the data also shows the RX 9060 has a much higher ceiling in compute-heavy modern workloads, and the head-to-head results are unambiguous.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is dramatically faster, scoring 88,183 versus 23,749 for the Quadro K6000, a 73.1% advantage.

Q: Does the Quadro K6000 win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the K6000 and two wins for the RX 9060 across the shared benchmarks.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The K6000’s average score of 19,030 is within 0.1% of the RTX 4050 Mobile and essentially tied with the RX 6600. The RX 9060’s 16,014 average sits 0.7% below the RTX 3060 Ti and 1% above the RX 7700.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The K6000 has 12 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 9060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, so bandwidth is nearly identical despite the different bus widths.

Q: Which card supports newer APIs?

A: The RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the K6000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 9060 packs 29,700 million transistors onto a 199 mm² die, yielding 149.2M transistors per mm². The K6000 has 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding 12.6M per mm².

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different eras and design philosophies. The Quadro K6000 uses the Kepler architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, with a GK110B chip. It has 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The die is large at 561 mm², and the transistor count is 7,080 million. Kepler was designed for high clock stability and professional workload reliability, using a simpler scalar design with fewer but larger compute units.

The Radeon RX 9060 uses RDNA 4.0 on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a Navi 44 chip. It has only 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but those units run at far higher clocks and are paired with 28 dedicated ray tracing cores. The die is just 199 mm², yet it packs 29,700 million transistors, a 149.2M per mm² density that is 11.8 times higher than the Kepler chip. RDNA 4.0 is a dual-issue design where each shading unit can process two operations per clock under certain conditions, which explains how a lower unit count achieves 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 versus the Kepler part’s 5.196 TFLOPS.

The RX 9060 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning 21.43 TFLOPS for both precisions. The K6000 has no FP16 rating in the database. The ray tracing cores on the RX 9060 are a major architectural addition, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the Kepler chip simply cannot do. The RX 9060’s texture rate is 334.9 GTexel/s versus 216.5 GTexel/s for the K6000, and its pixel rate is 191.4 GPixel/s versus 54.12 GPixel/s, both reflecting the much higher clock speeds.

The memory architecture diverges as well. The K6000 uses a 384-bit bus with GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective, while the RX 9060 uses a 128-bit bus with GDDR6 at 18 Gbps effective. The bandwidth figures are nearly identical, 288.4 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s, but the RX 9060 achieves it with a quarter of the bus width by using much faster memory. That is a significant advantage in power efficiency and board design. The RX 9060’s power consumption is 132 W versus 225 W for the K6000, and the recommended PSU is 300 W versus 550 W, showing the efficiency leap from the 4 nm node.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node is 28 nm for the K6000 versus 4 nm for the RX 9060. The K6000 has a base clock of 797 MHz and boost of 902 MHz, while the RX 9060 has a base of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost of 2990 MHz. The RX 9060’s boost clock is 3.3 times higher than the K6000’s boost.

Memory capacity differs: 12 GB GDDR5 on the K6000 versus 8 GB GDDR6 on the RX 9060. The bus width is 384-bit versus 128-bit, but bandwidth is nearly equal. The K6000 has more shading units (2,880 vs 1,792) and TMUs (240 vs 112), but fewer ROPs (48 vs 64). The RX 9060 has 28 ray tracing cores, which the K6000 lacks entirely.

The K6000’s FP32 throughput is 5.196 TFLOPS, while the RX 9060 delivers 21.43 TFLOPS. The RX 9060 also has FP16 at 21.43 TFLOPS, while the K6000 has no FP16 rating. The K6000 uses two 6-pin power connectors, the RX 9060 uses one 8-pin. The K6000 has a dual-slot design and is 267 mm long, while the RX 9060’s dimensions are not recorded in the database. The K6000 supports PCIe 3.0 x16, the RX 9060 supports PCIe 5.0 x16.

Display outputs differ: the K6000 has 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2, while the RX 9060 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a. The K6000 was released on 2013-07-22 and is end-of-life, with a successor in Quadro Maxwell. The RX 9060 was released on 2025-08-04 and is active production, with a predecessor in Navi III and no successor recorded. The K6000 has a launch MSRP of 5,265 USD; no launch MSRP is recorded for the RX 9060.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. For raw compute throughput and modern API support, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the superior card. Its 73.1% OpenCL lead and 35.6% Vulkan lead over the K6000 are decisive. The ray tracing cores, higher clock speeds, FP16 support, and newer API levels make it the only sensible choice for any workload that uses modern graphics features or general compute. Its lower power draw, 132 W versus 225 W, and lower PSU requirement, 300 W versus 550 W, also make it easier to integrate into a system.

However, the Quadro K6000 retains a surprising edge in aggregate benchmark standing. Its 63rd percentile versus the RX 9060’s 59th, and its higher average score of 19,030 versus 16,014, indicate that it performs more consistently across a broad set of legacy and professional tests. The K6000 also has 12 GB of memory versus 8 GB, which matters for large datasets that fit within that capacity. The 384-bit bus, while paired with slower GDDR5, provides similar bandwidth to the RX 9060’s 128-bit GDDR6 setup.

The production status is a deciding factor for new purchases. The K6000 is end-of-life, released in 2013, while the RX 9060 is active and current. For any new system build, the RX 9060 is the rational pick. The K6000 only makes sense in a legacy professional environment where its specific driver certification and 12 GB capacity are required, and where the software stack does not benefit from newer architectures. The RX 9060’s Passmark outliers are a concern, but the head-to-head results and theoretical specs outweigh those anomalies.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 wins in every modern compute and graphics scenario. OpenCL and Vulkan workloads are heavily in its favor, with 73.1% and 35.6% margins respectively. Any application that uses ray tracing, FP16 compute, or DirectX 12 Ultimate features will either not run on the K6000 or run poorly. The RX 9060’s higher pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s versus 54.12 GPixel/s gives it an edge in resolution-heavy rendering, and its texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s versus 216.5 GTexel/s helps with detailed scenes. Power efficiency is another win: 132 W versus 225 W means lower operating costs and easier cooling.

The Quadro K6000 wins in aggregate consistency and memory capacity. Its average score of 19,030 is 15.9% higher than the RX 9060’s 16,014, despite losing every head-to-head test. That suggests the K6000 performs better in a wider range of legacy benchmarks, particularly those that do not stress modern API features. The 12 GB memory capacity is 50% larger than the RX 9060’s 8 GB, which matters for holding large textures, training datasets, or multi-app professional workflows. Its 384-bit bus, while not delivering higher bandwidth, provides lower latency in certain access patterns. The K6000 also supports dual DVI outputs, which may be required for older displays or specific professional setups.

For a professional workstation running certified legacy applications, the K6000’s stability and memory capacity could still justify its use. For anything involving modern games, compute acceleration, or future software, the RX 9060 is the only choice. The benchmark data shows the RX 9060 is the faster card in direct comparison, but the K6000 holds its own in overall database standing, making it a niche pick rather than a general recommendation.