NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs NVIDIA Quadro 6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 6000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M represent two very different approaches to GPU design, separated by nearly four years of architecture evolution. The Quadro 6000 is a professional Fermi-era workstation card from 2010, while the GTX 850M is a Maxwell-based mobile chip from 2014. Despite their different markets and eras, benchmark data shows them landing surprisingly close in raw compute performance, with the older card edging out a narrow victory in the only shared test.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Quadro 6000 wins the head-to-head benchmark, but the margin is razor-thin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro 6000 scores 9846 against the GTX 850M's 9821, a delta of just 0.3%. In practical terms, these two GPUs are effectively tied in this workload. However, their suitability for different tasks diverges sharply based on architectural characteristics.

Pick the Quadro 6000 if your priority is professional workstation capability with a massive 6 GB frame buffer and a 384-bit memory bus. Its 143.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth is more than four times that of the GTX 850M, which matters for large datasets and multi-display professional workloads. The card's dual-slot design and 204 W TDP signal that it belongs in a desktop workstation, not a laptop. The Quadro 6000's percentile rank of 47 versus the GTX 850M's 46 confirms they sit at nearly identical positions in the overall GPU performance distribution.

Pick the GTX 850M for mobile use and modern API support. It has a 45 W TDP, which is less than a quarter of the Quadro's power draw, and it is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) for portable devices. The GTX 850M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro 6000 has no Vulkan support listed. If you need Vulkan or are building a laptop, the choice is clear. If you need raw memory bandwidth and professional display outputs like dual DisplayPort and S-Video, the Quadro 6000 is the only option with those features.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro 6000 uses the GF100 chip built on Fermi architecture at a 40 nm process node from TSMC. It packs 3,100 million transistors onto a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a large, power-hungry chip designed for maximum workstation throughput in its era.

The GTX 850M uses the GM107 chip built on Maxwell architecture at a 28 nm process node, also from TSMC. It contains 1,870 million transistors on a much smaller 148 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The newer process node and more efficient architecture allow the GTX 850M to deliver comparable compute performance at a fraction of the power.

The shading unit counts tell an interesting story. The Quadro 6000 has 448 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The GTX 850M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The GTX 850M has more shaders but far fewer ROPs, which explains its lower pixel rate of 14.43 GPixel/s versus the Quadro's 16.07 GPixel/s. Texture rate favors the GTX 850M at 36.08 GTexel/s versus 32.14 GTexel/s.

In raw FP32 compute, the GTX 850M actually leads with 1,154.6 GFLOPS against the Quadro's 1,027.7 GFLOPS. This is a 12.3% advantage for the newer chip despite its lower memory bandwidth and smaller die. Neither card lists FP16 support in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in FP32?

A: The GTX 850M leads with 1,154.6 GFLOPS versus the Quadro 6000's 1,027.7 GFLOPS. Despite this, the Quadro 6000 still wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark by 0.3%.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The Quadro 6000 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 143.4 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 850M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 32.03 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro has roughly 4.5 times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro 6000 has a 204 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, and uses one 6-pin plus one 8-pin power connector with a suggested 550 W PSU. The GTX 850M has a 45 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed because it is for portable devices.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The GTX 850M supports Vulkan 1.4 in addition to DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro 6000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do their benchmark percentiles compare?

A: The Quadro 6000 sits at the 47th percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 850M is at the 46th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 9846 and 9302 respectively, though the GTX 850M's average is pulled down by its additional Vulkan benchmark score of 8782.

Q: What are their physical form factors?

A: The Quadro 6000 is a 248 mm long, 111 mm tall dual-slot desktop card with display outputs of 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, and 1x S-Video. The GTX 850M has no listed dimensions and its display outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: GF100 vs GM107
• Architecture: Fermi vs Maxwell
• Generation: Quadro Fermi (x000) vs GeForce 800M
• Process Node: 40 nm vs 28 nm
• Transistors: 3,100 million vs 1,870 million
• Die Size: 529 mm² vs 148 mm²
• Transistor Density: 5.9M / mm² vs 12.6M / mm²
• Memory Clock: 747 MHz (3 Gbps effective) vs 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 6 GB vs 2 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR5 vs DDR3
• Memory Bus Width: 384 bit vs 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 143.4 GB/s vs 32.03 GB/s
• Shading Units: 448 vs 640
• TMUs: 56 vs 40
• ROPs: 48 vs 16
• Pixel Rate: 16.07 GPixel/s vs 14.43 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 32.14 GTexel/s vs 36.08 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,027.7 GFLOPS vs 1,154.6 GFLOPS
• TDP: 204 W vs 45 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs IGP
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs None
• Suggested PSU: 550 W vs none listed
• Bus Interface: PCIe 2.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video vs Portable Device Dependent
• Vulkan Support: None vs 1.4
• Dimensions: 248 mm x 111 mm vs none listed
• Release Date: 2010-12-09 vs 2014-03-11
• Predecessor: Quadro FX Tesla vs GeForce 700M
• Successor: Quadro Kepler vs GeForce 900M
• Launch MSRP: 4,399 USD vs none listed

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Quadro 6000 scores 9846 and the GTX 850M scores 9821. The Quadro wins by 0.3%, which is well within typical run-to-run variance for OpenCL workloads. This near-tie is remarkable given their architectural differences.

The GTX 850M also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 8782, which the Quadro 6000 cannot match because it has no Vulkan support. This means in any Vulkan-based workload, the GTX 850M is the only functional option.

Looking at nearest rivals provides context. The Quadro 6000's closest competitor is the Quadro M2000M at 9832 (0.1% difference), followed by the FirePro W5000 at 9803 (0.4%) and the GTX 1070 at 9780 (0.7%). The GTX 850M's closest rival is the GTX 465 at 9294 (0.1%), with the Radeon R7 M380 at 9313 (-0.1%) and the GTX 960 at 9273 (0.3%). These rival comparisons show both cards sitting in the middle of their respective performance clusters.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 6000 wins in memory-intensive scenarios. Its 143.4 GB/s bandwidth is 4.5 times higher than the GTX 850M's 32.03 GB/s, making it the clear choice for workloads that stream large datasets. The 6 GB frame buffer versus 2 GB means it can hold significantly more data on-card. Its pixel rate of 16.07 GPixel/s also beats the GTX 850M's 14.43 GPixel/s, giving it an edge in fill-rate-bound tasks. The dual DisplayPort outputs and S-Video support make it suitable for professional multi-monitor setups.

The GTX 850M wins in compute throughput and efficiency. Its FP32 performance of 1,154.6 GFLOPS exceeds the Quadro's 1,027.7 GFLOPS, meaning it processes more math per second in raw compute. Its texture rate of 36.08 GTexel/s also beats the Quadro's 32.14 GTexel/s. The 45 W TDP versus 204 W means it generates far less heat and can operate in laptops with no dedicated power connectors. Vulkan 1.4 support gives it access to modern graphics APIs that the Quadro cannot use.

For a system builder, the choice comes down to context. In a desktop workstation with a 550 W PSU and space for a 248 mm dual-slot card, the Quadro 6000 offers superior memory bandwidth and professional display outputs. In a portable system with tight power constraints, the GTX 850M offers better compute density, newer API support, and a fraction of the power draw. The benchmark scores say they are equals in OpenCL; the specifications say they are anything but interchangeable.