Intel Arc Pro A60 vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear generational split. The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test with a 58.3% margin and the Vulkan test with a 23.1% margin. The Arc Pro A60 posts an average benchmark score of 60,326, placing it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB manages an average of 43,262, landing in the 83rd percentile. For users prioritizing raw compute performance in modern API workloads, the Intel card is the stronger choice based on these measurements. However, the Quadro M6000 24 GB retains a massive memory capacity advantage with 24 GB versus 12 GB, and it holds a higher transistor count of 8,000 million on a larger die, which may matter for specific memory-bound professional tasks. The data suggests the Arc Pro A60 is the pick for performance-focused buyers, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB should be considered by those who need double the VRAM and are working within legacy PCIe 3.0 environments.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from entirely different design eras. The Intel Arc Pro A60 uses the DG2-256 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 11,500 million transistors into a 269 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 42.8M per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB, in contrast, relies on the GM200 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 8,000 million transistors spread over a much larger 601 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 13.3M per mm². This process node difference is stark: the Intel part is four generations newer in process technology, which explains its higher density and efficiency.

Clock behavior also diverges sharply. The Arc Pro A60 runs at a 900 MHz base and boosts to 2050 MHz, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB sits at 988 MHz base and 1114 MHz boost. The Intel card's boost clock is nearly double that of NVIDIA's, a direct consequence of the newer manufacturing process. The memory subsystem tells a different story: the Arc Pro A60 uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro M6000 24 GB uses 24 GB GDDR5 on a much wider 384 bit bus, but bandwidth comes in lower at 317.4 GB/s. So the Intel card wins on bandwidth per gigabyte, while NVIDIA wins on raw capacity.

Architecturally, the Intel Arc Pro A60 includes 16 ray tracing cores, which the Quadro M6000 24 GB completely lacks. Neither card has tensor cores. The Intel card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro M6000 24 GB is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), meaning no mesh shaders or other DX12 Ultimate features. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The interface also reflects the age gap: the Arc Pro A60 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The power draw is dramatically different, with Intel at 130 W TDP and NVIDIA at 250 W TDP, and the suggested PSU jumps from 300 W on the Intel to 600 W on the NVIDIA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded benchmarks favor Intel decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc Pro A60 scores 63,485 versus the Quadro M6000 24 GB's 40,098, a 58.3% lead. This is a substantial gap, indicating that the Intel architecture handles compute workloads far more effectively in this specific test. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Arc Pro A60 scores 57,166 versus 46,425, a 23.1% advantage. While still a win, the Vulkan gap is narrower, suggesting the NVIDIA card's older Maxwell architecture is better suited to this graphics API relative to its OpenCL performance.

What does this mean in context? The Arc Pro A60's average benchmark score of 60,326 places it within 0% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (which averages 60,347), effectively matching that flagship consumer card in the database's aggregate. It also sits 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140) and 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896). The Quadro M6000 24 GB, by contrast, averages 43,262, which puts it 0% from the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (43,268) and 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43,223). The gap between the two cards in the database is roughly 40% of the Quadro's own average, a substantial chasm that no single workload metric in the data can bridge.

One nuance: the Quadro M6000 24 GB's max memory capacity of 24 GB is double the Intel's 12 GB, and while that doesn't show up in these compute benchmarks, it could matter for datasets that exceed 12 GB. The data as recorded does not include any memory-heavy tests, so the performance comparison is strictly compute-focused.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 averages 63,326, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB averages 43,262. The Intel card is about 40% higher.

Q: Does the Quadro M6000 24 GB have any memory advantage?

A: Yes. The Quadro offers 24 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 384-bit bus, while the Arc Pro A60 has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The Quadro's bus width is twice as wide, and its capacity is double, though its bandwidth (317.4 GB/s) is lower than the Intel's (384.0 GB/s).

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has no ray tracing cores at all.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has a 130 W TDP and recommends a 300 W PSU. The Quadro M6000 24 GB draws 250 W and recommends a 600 W PSU.

Q: Is the Quadro M6000 24 GB still in production?

A: No, the database lists it as end-of-life, with a successor in the Quadro Pascal series. The Intel Arc Pro A60 is currently active.

Q: Which card has a better DirectX feature level?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro M6000 24 GB supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). The Intel card also has a PCIe 4.0 interface versus the Quadro's PCIe 3.0.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins on every measured benchmark, so its advantage is clear in compute throughput. It also leads on process technology (6 nm vs 28 nm), memory bandwidth (384.0 GB/s vs 317.4 GB/s), clock speed (2050 MHz boost vs 1114 MHz boost), and power efficiency (130 W vs 250 W). It is the only one with ray tracing support and DX12 Ultimate features. For any workload that stresses compute, graphics, or modern API features, the data favors the Intel.

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB wins on memory capacity outright, at 24 GB versus 12 GB. It also has a wider 384-bit memory bus, which traditionally benefits certain bandwidth-bound workloads, but the recorded bandwidth is actually lower at 317.4 GB/s. It supports 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs plus a DVI port, while the Intel has 4x DisplayPort 2.0. The Quadro also holds its own in Vulkan relatively better than in OpenCL, as the delta is smaller. Finally, the Quadro has a higher transistor count of 8,000 million, but that is on a much less dense die. For legacy compatibility with PCIe 3.0 systems, the Quadro is the safer bet, but the data does not show any performance win in its favor.

Specification Differences

Process Node: The Intel Arc Pro A60 is on 6 nm TSMC, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB is on 28 nm TSMC.

Die Size: Intel: 269 mm². NVIDIA: 601 mm².

Transistor Count: Intel has 11,500 million, NVIDIA has 8,000 million.

Transistor Density: Intel achieves 42.8M / mm², NVIDIA achieves 13.3M / mm².

Clock Speeds: The Intel base clock is 900 MHz, boost 2050 MHz. The NVIDIA base is 988 MHz, boost 1114 MHz.

Memory: The Intel uses 12 GB GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA uses 24 GB GDDR5 with a 384-bit bus and 317.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Shading Units: Intel has 2048, NVIDIA has 3072.

TMUs: Intel 128, NVIDIA 192.

ROPs: Intel 64, NVIDIA 96.

Ray Tracing Cores: Intel 16, NVIDIA 0.

Pixel Rate: Intel 131.2 GPixel/s, NVIDIA 106.9 GPixel/s.

Texture Rate: Intel 262.4 GTexel/s, NVIDIA 213.9 GTexel/s.

FP32 Performance: Intel 8.397 TFLOPS, NVIDIA 6.844 TFLOPS.

FP16 Performance: Intel 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1), NVIDIA not specified.

TDP: Intel 130 W, NVIDIA 250 W.

Slot Width: Intel single-slot, NVIDIA dual-slot.

Power Connectors: The NVIDIA uses 1x 8-pin, the Intel does not list one.

Suggested PSU: Intel 300 W, NVIDIA 600 W.

Bus Interface: Intel PCIe 4.0 x16, NVIDIA PCIe 3.0 x16.

Display Outputs: Intel 4x DisplayPort 2.0, NVIDIA 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2.

DirectX Support: Intel 12 Ultimate (12_2), NVIDIA 12 (12_1).

Production Status: Intel active, NVIDIA end-of-life.

Release Date: Intel 2023-06-05, NVIDIA 2016-03-04.

Predecessor/Successor: The NVIDIA's predecessor is Quadro Kepler, successor is Quadro Pascal. The Intel lists none.

Dimensions: The NVIDIA is 267 mm long and 111 mm high; the Intel has no recorded dimensions.

Benchmark Scores: The Intel scores 63,485 in OpenCL and 57,166 in Vulkan. The NVIDIA scores 40,098 in OpenCL and 46,425 in Vulkan.

The data shows a modern card with a massive efficiency lead, and a legacy card with a memory capacity edge. The Intel Arc Pro A60 is the faster and more feature-complete choice for current and future workloads, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB remains relevant only for its 24 GB capacity and proven PCIe 3.0 compatibility.