NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 occupy different ends of the GPU spectrum, separated by two generations of architecture and vastly different design goals. The GTX 1060 3 GB is a mainstream Pascal part from 2016, while the Quadro RTX 4000 is a professional Turing workstation card from 2018. Benchmark data shows the Quadro RTX 4000 dominates in compute and API-specific workloads, but the GTX 1060 3 GB holds its own in overall percentile ranking despite being far older and less complex. This analysis uses only the provided benchmark scores, architectural facts, and rival comparisons to determine where each card wins.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro RTX 4000 wins decisively in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro RTX 4000 scores 74,540 against the GTX 1060 3 GB’s 27,001, a delta of -63.8% (meaning the GTX 1060 trails by that margin). In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further: the Quadro RTX 4000 posts 78,844 versus 17,475, a -77.8% delta. These are not marginal victories; they represent a 2.76x advantage in OpenCL and a 4.51x advantage in Vulkan. The Quadro RTX 4000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 1060 3 GB only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). For any workload leveraging modern APIs, ray tracing cores, or tensor cores, the Quadro RTX 4000 is the clear pick.

The GTX 1060 3 GB wins in one specific category: overall percentile ranking. It sits at the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro RTX 4000 sits at the 61st percentile. Its average benchmark score of 19,334 also edges out the Quadro RTX 4000’s 17,789. This is a statistical quirk driven by the mix of tests included in the average—the GTX 1060 3 GB has only three benchmark entries (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan), all of which are relatively strong for its class, while the Quadro RTX 4000’s ten entries include several low-scoring Passmark tests (e.g., 52 in DirectX 12, 108 in DirectX 10) that drag its average down. In raw compute and graphics API performance, the Quadro RTX 4000 wins every measurable test.

The Verdict

Pick the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 if your work involves OpenCL or Vulkan compute, modern DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, or any ray-traced or tensor-accelerated workload. The data shows a 63.8% lead in OpenCL and a 77.8% lead in Vulkan over the GTX 1060 3 GB. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 416.0 GB/s bandwidth, 36 RT cores, and 288 tensor cores provide capabilities the GTX 1060 3 GB simply lacks. The Quadro RTX 4000 also offers a single-slot form factor and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a plus USB Type-C outputs, making it suitable for professional multi-display setups.

Pick the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB if you prioritize overall percentile standing among all GPUs or if your software relies on Geekbench Metal performance—the GTX 1060 3 GB scores 13,527 in that test, which has no equivalent on the Quadro RTX 4000’s benchmark list. Its 120 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU make it easier to integrate into low-power systems, and its 1x 6-pin connector is simpler than the Quadro RTX 4000’s 1x 8-pin. However, the GTX 1060 3 GB loses every direct head-to-head benchmark, so it is only a sensible choice for legacy Metal-based workflows or budget-constrained builds where the Quadro RTX 4000’s 160 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU are prohibitive.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Quadro RTX 4000 comes in Geekbench Vulkan. The Quadro RTX 4000 scores 78,844, while the GTX 1060 3 GB manages only 17,475—a 77.8% deficit. This is a 4.5x performance gap, far exceeding the difference in shading units (2,304 vs 1,152) or texture rate (222.5 GTexel/s vs 123.0 GTexel/s). The Vulkan advantage likely stems from the Quadro RTX 4000’s Turing architecture, which supports newer instruction sets and has 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores that can accelerate certain compute tasks even outside ray tracing. The GTX 1060 3 GB, based on Pascal, has no such dedicated hardware.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro RTX 4000 again wins, scoring 74,540 versus 27,001—a 63.8% lead. This translates to roughly 2.76x the performance. The Quadro RTX 4000’s FP32 throughput of 7.119 TFLOPS is 1.81x the GTX 1060 3 GB’s 3.935 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance of 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) dwarfs the GTX 1060 3 GB’s 61.49 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio). The memory subsystem also favors the Quadro RTX 4000: 416.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 192.2 GB/s, with a 256-bit bus versus 192-bit. These architectural advantages compound in OpenCL workloads that stress memory bandwidth and FP16 compute.

The GTX 1060 3 GB’s best showing is in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 13,527. This test is not available for the Quadro RTX 4000 in the data, so no direct comparison exists. However, the GTX 1060 3 GB’s average benchmark score of 19,334 is 8.7% higher than the Quadro RTX 4000’s 17,789, driven by the Quadro RTX 4000’s weak Passmark results. The Quadro RTX 4000 scores 205 in Passmark DirectX 9, 128 in DirectX 11, and 52 in DirectX 12—numbers that seem anomalously low given its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,873. These discrepancies suggest the Passmark tests are not representative of the Quadro RTX 4000’s true capabilities, but they do affect its average.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB has an average benchmark score of 19,334, compared to 17,789 for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000. However, the Quadro RTX 4000 wins every direct head-to-head test, so the average is skewed by the GTX 1060 3 GB’s limited benchmark set.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro RTX 4000 in Vulkan?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 scores 78,844 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 17,475 for the GTX 1060 3 GB, representing a 77.8% advantage. That is roughly 4.5 times the performance.

Q: Does the GTX 1060 3 GB support ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 1060 3 GB has no RT cores (the data lists null for rtCores). The Quadro RTX 4000 has 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, which enable ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads.

Q: What memory advantages does the Quadro RTX 4000 have?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 416.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1060 3 GB has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 192.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 4000’s bandwidth is 2.16x higher.

Q: Which card has a better percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The GTX 1060 3 GB ranks at the 64th percentile, while the Quadro RTX 4000 ranks at the 61st percentile. This is despite the Quadro RTX 4000 winning all head-to-head benchmarks, likely due to the different test suites used in the averages.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 1060 3 GB has a TDP of 120 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W, using one 6-pin connector. The Quadro RTX 4000 has a TDP of 160 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W, using one 8-pin connector.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 1060 3 GB uses the GP106 chip on NVIDIA’s Pascal architecture, built on TSMC’s 16 nm process. It contains 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.0M per mm². The Quadro RTX 4000 uses the TU104 chip on Turing, built on TSMC’s 12 nm process, with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die—a density of 25.0M per mm². The Quadro RTX 4000 has over 3x the transistors and 2.7x the die area, reflecting its far more complex feature set.

Core counts differ substantially. The GTX 1060 3 GB has 1,152 shading units, 72 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The Quadro RTX 4000 has 2,304 shading units (exactly double), 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro RTX 4000 also adds 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, which have no equivalent on the GTX 1060 3 GB. Pixel rate is 98.88 GPixel/s for the Quadro RTX 4000 versus 81.98 GPixel/s for the GTX 1060 3 GB, and texture rate is 222.5 GTexel/s versus 123.0 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The GTX 1060 3 GB runs at a base of 1506 MHz and boost of 1708 MHz, while the Quadro RTX 4000 runs at 1005 MHz base and 1545 MHz boost. The GTX 1060 3 GB has higher raw clocks, but the Quadro RTX 4000’s superior IPC and wider execution resources overcome that deficit. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 1060 3 GB uses 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the Quadro RTX 4000 uses 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective) GDDR6.

API support reflects their generations. The GTX 1060 3 GB supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro RTX 4000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX 12 Ultimate designation includes ray tracing and mesh shaders, which the GTX 1060 3 GB cannot handle. Both cards use PCIe 3.0 x16, and both are end-of-life products. The GTX 1060 3 GB measures 250 mm in length (9.8 inches), while the Quadro RTX 4000 is shorter at 241 mm (9.5 inches) and adds a height of 111 mm (4.4 inches). The Quadro RTX 4000 is single-slot; the GTX 1060 3 GB is dual-slot.