NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M vs NVIDIA Quadro P600 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M and NVIDIA Quadro P600 are both end-of-life mobile and workstation GPUs that land in the same performance tier, but their benchmark profiles reveal distinct strengths. The GTX 860M, built on the older Kepler architecture, offers a higher theoretical shading throughput and texture fill rate, while the Quadro P600, based on Pascal, delivers superior real-world scores in compute and DirectX 12 workloads. With an average benchmark score of 2967 against the P600’s 2923, the GTX 860M holds a narrow 1.5% lead in aggregate, yet the P600 wins eight of the nine head-to-head tests. The data suggests these are not interchangeable parts; the choice depends on whether the workload favors raw pixel pushing or modern API efficiency and compute execution.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head results split cleanly along workload boundaries. The Quadro P600 dominates in compute-oriented and modern graphics API tests, while the GTX 860M’s sole victory comes in a legacy DirectX 10 scenario. The P600’s wins include the Geekbench OpenCL test (11181 vs 10461), Geekbench Vulkan (9755 vs 9648), Passmark DirectX 11 (24 vs 23), DirectX 12 (14 vs 13), DirectX 9 (56 vs 55), Passmark G2D (529 vs 226), Passmark G3D (3317 vs 3081), and Passmark GPU Compute (1415 vs 1251). The GTX 860M claims only Passmark DirectX 10, scoring 15 against the P600’s 14, a 7.1% margin.

This split indicates the P600 is the stronger choice for general-purpose GPU compute and applications leveraging Vulkan or DirectX 12, where its architecture executes more efficiently. The GTX 860M’s advantage, if any, lies in older DirectX 10 titles or workloads that rely on its higher texture fill rate. For users running modern CAD, rendering, or OpenCL-based analysis, the P600’s consistency across compute tests makes it the more versatile option. Conversely, the GTX 860M’s higher FP32 throughput (2.108 TFLOPS vs 1,195.8 GFLOPS) does not translate into benchmark victories, suggesting that raw theoretical output is less impactful than architectural efficiency in these tests.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different fabrication nodes and design philosophies. The GTX 860M uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, while the Quadro P600 uses the GP107 chip on a 14 nm Samsung process. This node advantage allows the P600 to pack 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.0M / mm², compared to the GTX 860M’s 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die at 12.0M / mm². The smaller, denser P600 also runs at significantly higher clocks: a base of 1329 MHz and boost of 1557 MHz, versus the GTX 860M’s 797 MHz base and 915 MHz boost.

Core configuration differs dramatically. The GTX 860M fields 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, resulting in a texture rate of 87.84 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 21.96 GPixel/s. The Quadro P600 has only 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, yielding 37.37 GTexel/s and 24.91 GPixel/s. Despite having three times fewer shading units and TMUs, the P600’s higher clocks and Pascal efficiency allow it to match or exceed the GTX 860M in most tests. The P600 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 860M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, explaining the P600’s advantage in DX12 and Vulkan benchmarks.

Memory subsystems are similar in size but differ in speed. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but the GTX 860M runs memory at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the P600 runs at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for 64.13 GB/s. The GTX 860M’s higher bandwidth does not help it in compute tests, where the P600’s architecture compensates with better memory efficiency. Power consumption favors the P600 at 40 W versus the GTX 860M’s 75 W, and the P600 is a single-slot card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the GTX 860M’s display outputs are portable-device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the comparison is the Passmark G2D test, where the Quadro P600 scores 529 against the GTX 860M’s 226, a 57.3% advantage. This is the clearest indicator of the P600’s superior 2D and interface performance, likely benefiting from its newer architecture and higher clocks. In compute workloads, the P600 leads Passmark GPU Compute by 11.6% (1415 vs 1251) and Geekbench OpenCL by 6.4% (11181 vs 10461), showing that its lower shading unit count does not hinder parallel processing tasks.

In 3D graphics, the P600 wins Passmark G3D with 3317 versus 3081, a 7.1% margin, and also edges out the GTX 860M in Passmark DirectX 11 (24 vs 23, 4.2%) and DirectX 12 (14 vs 13, 7.1%). The DirectX 12 result is notable because the P600’s feature level 12_1 allows more advanced rendering paths, while the GTX 860M’s 11_0 limit holds it back. The P600 also wins DirectX 9 by a narrow 1.8% (56 vs 55) and Vulkan by 1.1% (9755 vs 9648). The GTX 860M’s only win, DirectX 10, shows a 7.1% lead (15 vs 14), but this is a minor test where both scores are low.

Interpretation of these deltas requires context. The P600’s wins in G2D and compute are substantial, while its graphics API wins are modest, ranging from 1.1% to 7.1%. The GTX 860M’s single win is also small in absolute terms. The overall pattern indicates the P600 is more consistent and efficient, particularly in tasks that stress the driver and API overhead, while the GTX 860M’s higher texture rate does not yield practical benefits in these benchmarks. The 1.5% aggregate advantage for the GTX 860M (2967 vs 2923) is driven by its higher scores in the few tests it wins or ties, but the P600’s breadth of wins makes it the more reliable performer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M has an average benchmark score of 2967, which is 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro P600’s 2923.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro P600 in 2D tests?

A: The Quadro P600 scores 529 in Passmark G2D versus the GTX 860M’s 226, representing a 57.3% advantage.

Q: Does the GTX 860M win any benchmarks against the P600?

A: Yes, the GTX 860M wins only the Passmark DirectX 10 test, scoring 15 against the P600’s 14, a 7.1% margin.

Q: What explains the P600’s lead in DirectX 12 performance?

A: The P600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 860M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0), allowing the P600 to use more advanced rendering features. The P600 scores 14 in Passmark DirectX 12 versus 13 for the GTX 860M.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in compute workloads?

A: The Quadro P600 leads in all compute tests: Passmark GPU Compute (1415 vs 1251, 11.6% faster) and Geekbench OpenCL (11181 vs 10461, 6.4% faster).

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock and what is the difference?

A: The Quadro P600 has a boost clock of 1557 MHz, while the GTX 860M boosts to 915 MHz, a difference of 642 MHz in favor of the P600.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M | NVIDIA Quadro P600 |

|---------------|------------------------|--------------------|

| Architecture | Kepler | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 797 MHz | 1329 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 915 MHz | 1557 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.00 GB/s | 64.13 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1152 | 384 |

| TMUs | 96 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 21.96 GPixel/s | 24.91 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 87.84 GTexel/s | 37.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.108 TFLOPS | 1,195.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | null | 18.68 GFLOPS (1:64)|

| TDP | 75 W | 40 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | null | 200 W |

| Display Outputs| Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support| 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2014-03-09 | 2017-02-06 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 700M | Quadro Maxwell |

| Successor | GeForce 900M | Quadro Volta |