NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Comparison

Launched in late 2017, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB is a Pascal-generation part built for mainstream desktop use, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000, released in August 2018, is a Turing-generation workstation card aimed at professional rendering and compute tasks. The database shows two very different performance classes, with the RTX 8000 dominating the recorded benchmarks. This analysis compares architecture, specifications, and measured results to clarify where each card fits.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB records an average benchmark score of 33,694, while the Quadro RTX 8000 averages 28,421. Despite the RTX 8000’s far higher raw performance in individual tests, its average is pulled down by several low DirectX scores.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 scores 101,883 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 67.2% higher than the GTX 1060 5 GB’s 33,397. That delta represents a massive gap in compute throughput.

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The Quadro RTX 8000 again wins, scoring 122,637 versus 33,991 for the GTX 1060 5 GB, a 72.3% advantage. The RTX 8000’s Vulkan performance is more than three times higher.

Q: Are the cards in the same performance percentile?

A: No. The GTX 1060 5 GB sits in the 78th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro RTX 8000 sits in the 74th percentile. This is counterintuitive given the RTX 8000’s wins, but the RTX 8000’s average is depressed by its passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores, which are all below 220.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card?

A: For the GTX 1060 5 GB, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA RTX A5000 (average score 33,622, 0.2% lower), AMD Radeon RX 7700S (33,849, 0.5% higher), AMD Radeon HD 7950 (33,951, 0.8% higher), and AMD Radeon RX 480 (33,997, 0.9% higher). For the Quadro RTX 8000, nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro S7150 (28,117, 1.1% lower), AMD Radeon R9 M295X (28,580, 0.6% lower), AMD Radeon RX 570 (28,766, 1.2% higher), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28,020, 1.4% lower).

Q: Which card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the Quadro RTX 8000, which lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The GTX 1060 5 GB supports DirectX 12 (12_1) only.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and process nodes. The GTX 1060 5 GB uses the GP106 chip on a 16 nm process from TSMC, while the Quadro RTX 8000 uses the TU102 chip on a 12 nm process, also from TSMC. The transistor counts differ substantially: the GTX 1060 5 GB has 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a density of 22.0M per mm². The RTX 8000 packs 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die, with a density of 24.7M per mm². The RTX 8000’s die is nearly four times larger in area and holds over four times more transistors.

Architecturally, the GTX 1060 5 GB is Pascal, a design without dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores. The RTX 8000 is Turing, and it includes 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. These features enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads, which the Pascal card cannot perform at the hardware level. The RTX 8000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), a feature set that includes ray tracing and mesh shaders; the GTX 1060 5 GB is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so API coverage is similar outside of DirectX.

The memory architectures differ as well. The GTX 1060 5 GB uses 5 GB of GDDR5 on a 160-bit bus, with 160.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 8000 has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, yielding 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a 4.2 times increase in capacity and a 4.2 times increase in bandwidth. The RTX 8000’s memory clock is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1060 5 GB, but the wider bus gives the RTX 8000 the bandwidth advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the Quadro RTX 8000 wins decisively.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1060 5 GB scores 33,397, while the RTX 8000 scores 101,883. That is a 67.2% higher score for the RTX 8000. This test stresses general compute through OpenCL, and the RTX 8000’s 4,608 shading units, compared to 1,280 for the GTX 1060 5 GB, explain the gap. The RTX 8000 also has 288 texture mapping units versus 80, and 96 ROPs versus 40. The raw throughput numbers support this: the RTX 8000 delivers 16.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GTX 1060 5 GB delivers 4.375 TFLOPS. In FP16, the RTX 8000 reaches 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the GTX 1060 5 GB manages only 68.36 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), a difference of nearly 477 times.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 8000 scores 122,637 versus 33,991 for the GTX 1060 5 GB, a 72.3% advantage. Vulkan is a lower-overhead API, and the RTX 8000’s architectural advantages, including more cores and higher memory bandwidth, allow it to pull further ahead than in OpenCL. The RTX 8000’s pixel rate is 169.9 GPixel/s versus 68.36 GPixel/s for the GTX 1060 5 GB, and its texture rate is 509.8 GTexel/s versus 136.7 GTexel/s. These figures are consistent with the Vulkan score difference.

The head-to-head record shows the RTX 8000 winning both tests, with no wins for the GTX 1060 5 GB. However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The RTX 8000 has a lower average (28,421) than the GTX 1060 5 GB (33,694), because the RTX 8000’s passmark scores are poor. The passmark DirectX 10 score is 137, DirectX 11 is 188, DirectX 12 is 79, and DirectX 9 is 211. The passmark G2D score is 866 and G3D is 19,799, with a compute score of 9,992. These low DirectX scores drag down the RTX 8000’s average, despite its dominance in Geekbench tests.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two cards are substantial and cover nearly every major component.

• Process node: 16 nm (GTX 1060 5 GB) versus 12 nm (RTX 8000)
• Transistors: 4,400 million versus 18,600 million
• Die size: 200 mm² versus 754 mm²
• Transistor density: 22.0M / mm² versus 24.7M / mm²
• Base clock: 1506 MHz versus 1395 MHz
• Boost clock: 1709 MHz versus 1770 MHz
• Memory clock: 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 5 GB versus 48 GB
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus GDDR6
• Memory bus width: 160 bit versus 384 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 160.2 GB/s versus 672.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 1,280 versus 4,608
• Texture mapping units: 80 versus 288
• ROP units: 40 versus 96
• RT cores: None versus 72
• Tensor cores: None versus 576
• Pixel rate: 68.36 GPixel/s versus 169.9 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 136.7 GTexel/s versus 509.8 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 4.375 TFLOPS versus 16.31 TFLOPS
• FP16 performance: 68.36 GFLOPS (1:64) versus 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 120 W versus 260 W
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin versus 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 600 W
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Dimensions: 250 mm (9.8 inches) versus 267 mm (10.5 inches), with the RTX 8000 also having a listed height of 111 mm (4.4 inches)

The GTX 1060 5 GB has a higher base clock (1506 MHz versus 1395 MHz), but the RTX 8000 has a higher boost clock (1770 MHz versus 1709 MHz). The RTX 8000 also requires more power, with a 260 W TDP versus 120 W, and recommends a 600 W PSU versus 300 W. The RTX 8000’s launch MSRP is 9,999 USD, while the GTX 1060 5 GB has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data does not support a single best card for all users; instead, it defines two distinct roles. The Quadro RTX 8000 is the clear performance winner in compute and graphics workloads measured by Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan. Its 67.2% and 72.3% leads over the GTX 1060 5 GB are massive, and its 48 GB of GDDR6 memory with 672.0 GB/s bandwidth is in a different class entirely. The inclusion of 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores makes it suitable for ray tracing and AI tasks that the GTX 1060 5 GB cannot accelerate in hardware.

However, the GTX 1060 5 GB has a higher average benchmark score (33,694 versus 28,421) and sits in a higher percentile (78 versus 74). This is due to the RTX 8000’s unusually low passmark DirectX scores, which range from 79 to 211. For users running DirectX 9, 10, 11, or 12 workloads that resemble those passmark tests, the GTX 1060 5 GB may actually perform better in practice, despite its lower raw specs. The GTX 1060 5 GB also consumes far less power (120 W versus 260 W) and requires a smaller PSU (300 W versus 600 W), making it easier to integrate into existing systems.

For a professional workstation handling compute, Vulkan, or OpenCL tasks, the RTX 8000 is the obvious choice from the recorded data. For legacy DirectX applications or scenarios where the passmark scores are representative, the GTX 1060 5 GB appears more reliable. The RTX 8000’s launch MSRP of 9,999 USD also places it in a completely different market segment, but the price is not part of this analysis’s performance conclusions.

Where Each One Wins

Quadro RTX 8000 wins in: Geekbench OpenCL (101,883 versus 33,397, 67.2% higher), Geekbench Vulkan (122,637 versus 33,991, 72.3% higher), raw compute throughput (16.31 TFLOPS FP32 versus 4.375 TFLOPS), FP16 performance (32.62 TFLOPS versus 68.36 GFLOPS), memory bandwidth (672.0 GB/s versus 160.2 GB/s), memory capacity (48 GB versus 5 GB), pixel rate (169.9 GPixel/s versus 68.36 GPixel/s), texture rate (509.8 GTexel/s versus 136.7 GTexel/s), and hardware features including 72 RT cores and 576 tensor cores. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which the GTX 1060 5 GB cannot.

GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB wins in: Average benchmark score (33,694 versus 28,421), percentile ranking (78 versus 74), base clock speed (1506 MHz versus 1395 MHz), power efficiency (120 W versus 260 W TDP), lower PSU requirement (300 W versus 600 W), and passmark DirectX performance based on its higher average. The GTX 1060 5 GB also has a smaller physical footprint (250 mm versus 267 mm length). The GTX 1060 5 GB’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 480 (0.9% lower score) and the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (0.8% lower), placing it in a competitive mainstream segment. The RTX 8000’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD FirePro S7150 (1.1% lower) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (1.4% lower), show that its average performance is more modest relative to its class.

For users who prioritize compute acceleration in OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX 8000 is unmatched in this comparison. For users who run older DirectX titles or who want a lower-power card with a higher average score, the GTX 1060 5 GB is the better fit. The choice hinges on workload type, not on a single overall winner. The data clearly shows the RTX 8000 as the compute powerhouse, while the GTX 1060 5 GB holds an advantage in average score and efficiency.