NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 vs NVIDIA P106-090 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance advantage for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 across all three shared tests. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 2060 scores 1242 points against the P106-090's 509 points, a 144% higher result. This is not a marginal gap; it places the two cards in entirely different performance tiers for modern DirectX 12 workloads.

The compute-oriented results widen the divide further. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 2060 records 65,014 points versus 21,304 for the P106-090, a 205.2% advantage. The Vulkan test shows the largest relative gap: 65,846 points against 18,596, a 254.1% difference. These results indicate that the RTX 2060 delivers more than triple the raw compute throughput in Vulkan, and over three times the OpenCL score.

Interpreting these numbers through the database's rival comparisons adds context. The RTX 2060's average benchmark score of 15,290 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon 680M (15,270) and 0.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199). Its percentile rank of 58 means it outperforms 58% of all GPUs in the database. The P106-090, by contrast, averages 13,470, sitting 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (13,515) but 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13,407). Its percentile rank of 54 shows it beats 54% of all GPUs, a surprisingly competitive position given the score gap between the two cards.

The head-to-head table records 3 wins for the RTX 2060 and 0 for the P106-090. No test in the shared set favors the mining card. The largest single delta, 254.1% in Geekbench Vulkan, suggests architectural efficiency differences amplify the hardware disparity. The smallest delta, 144% in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, still represents a massive real-world performance gap.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 averages 15,290 points across all recorded benchmarks, while the NVIDIA P106-090 averages 13,470 points, a difference of 1,820 points.

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

A: The RTX 2060 scores 65,846 points, which is 254.1% higher than the P106-090's 18,596 points, the largest relative gap in the head-to-head results.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each card?

A: The RTX 2060 sits at the 58th percentile of all GPUs, while the P106-090 sits at the 54th percentile.

Q: Does the P106-090 win any benchmark against the RTX 2060?

A: No. The database records 3 wins for the RTX 2060 and 0 for the P106-090 across the shared tests.

Q: How does the RTX 2060's score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 15,290 is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 680M (15,270) and 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199).

Q: How does the P106-090's score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 13,470 is 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7770M (13,536) and 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (13,515), but 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13,407).

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and manufacturing processes. The RTX 2060 uses the TU106 chip built on Turing architecture at a 12 nm process node from TSMC. It packs 10,800 million transistors into a 445 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.3 million per mm². The P106-090 uses the GP106 chip on the older Pascal architecture, also from TSMC but at a 16 nm node. It contains 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, with a density of 22.0 million per mm². The RTX 2060 therefore has over twice the transistor count and more than double the die area.

The compute resources differ substantially. The RTX 2060 features 1,920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. It also includes 30 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the P106-090, which has no RT or tensor core entries. The P106-090 offers 768 shading units and 48 TMUs, with the same 48 ROPs. This means the RTX 2060 has 2.5 times the shading units and 2.5 times the TMUs.

Clock behavior shows a different profile. The RTX 2060 runs at 1365 MHz base and 1680 MHz boost, while the P106-090 runs at 1354 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost. Despite the similar base clocks, the RTX 2060's higher boost and far larger shader count produce dramatically higher throughput. The pixel rate for the RTX 2060 is 80.64 GPixel/s versus 73.49 GPixel/s for the P106-090, a modest difference. The texture rate, however, diverges sharply: 201.6 GTexel/s for the RTX 2060 versus 73.49 GTexel/s for the P106-090. FP32 compute measures 6.451 TFLOPS for the RTX 2060 against 2.352 TFLOPS for the P106-090, confirming the RTX 2060 has nearly triple the single-precision throughput.

Memory architecture also separates the two. The RTX 2060 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The P106-090 uses 3 GB of GDDR5 at 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective), also on a 192-bit bus, but only reaches 192.2 GB/s. The RTX 2060 has double the memory capacity and 75% more bandwidth. The bus interface differs as well: the RTX 2060 connects via PCIe 3.0 x16, while the P106-090 uses PCIe 1.0 x1, a bandwidth bottleneck that further limits the mining card's practical performance.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for nearly any use case. The RTX 2060 wins every benchmark in the shared set, with advantages ranging from 144% to 254.1%. Its higher average score (15,290 versus 13,470) and better percentile rank (58 versus 54) reinforce this. The RTX 2060 also brings features the P106-090 lacks: ray tracing cores, tensor cores, display outputs, and a modern PCIe interface. The P106-090's only notable advantage is power efficiency on paper, with a 75 W TDP against 160 W, but this comes with a severe performance cost.

For any workload involving DirectX 12, Vulkan, OpenCL, or general GPU compute, the RTX 2060 is the only rational selection. The P106-090's PCIe 1.0 x1 interface and lack of display outputs make it unsuitable for standard desktop use. Its 3 GB memory capacity and 192.2 GB/s bandwidth further limit its applicability. The RTX 2060's 6 GB GDDR6 and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth provide headroom for modern workloads. Buyers should note that the RTX 2060 carries a launch MSRP of 349 USD, while the P106-090 has no recorded launch price.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node is 12 nm for the RTX 2060 versus 16 nm for the P106-090. Transistor count is 10,800 million versus 4,400 million. Die size is 445 mm² versus 200 mm². The RTX 2060 has 1,920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs; the P106-090 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Ray tracing cores number 30 on the RTX 2060 and are absent on the P106-090. Tensor cores number 240 on the RTX 2060 and are also absent on the mining card.

Memory differs in size, type, and bandwidth: 6 GB GDDR6 at 336.0 GB/s versus 3 GB GDDR5 at 192.2 GB/s. The base clocks are close (1365 MHz versus 1354 MHz), but boost clocks differ (1680 MHz versus 1531 MHz). The FP32 throughput is 6.451 TFLOPS versus 2.352 TFLOPS. FP16 shows an even larger architecture gap: 12.90 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) for the RTX 2060 versus 36.74 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio) for the P106-090, a difference of over 350 times.

The TDP is 160 W versus 75 W. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus 1x 6-pin. The suggested PSU is 450 W versus 250 W. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 1.0 x1. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, and 1x USB Type-C on the RTX 2060; the P106-090 has no outputs. Physical dimensions are 229 mm length (9 inches) for the RTX 2060 versus 250 mm (9.8 inches) for the P106-090. Both are dual-slot cards. The RTX 2060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, while the P106-090 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. Both support Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 2060 wins in every recorded benchmark category. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, its 144% advantage suggests it handles modern DirectX 12 rendering far better. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 205.2% gap indicates superior general-purpose compute for tasks like image processing or scientific workloads. In Geekbench Vulkan, the 254.1% lead shows the Turing architecture's Vulkan implementation is dramatically more efficient than Pascal's.

The P106-090 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its only potential edge is the lower 75 W TDP, which could matter in power-constrained environments, and its 250 mm length is slightly longer but still dual-slot. The card's 3 GB memory and 192.2 GB/s bandwidth might suffice for very light tasks, but the PCIe 1.0 x1 interface severely restricts data transfer. For mining-specific workloads, the P106-090's design intent, no data in the shared benchmarks supports a recommendation over the RTX 2060.

Use-case splits from the data are straightforward. The RTX 2060 suits gamers, content creators, and compute users who need DirectX 12 Ultimate features, ray tracing, tensor acceleration, and display connectivity. The P106-090, with no display outputs and a mining-focused design, serves only headless compute roles where the 75 W power draw is paramount. Even then, the RTX 2060's 160 W TDP buys over three times the FP32 throughput in Vulkan and double the memory bandwidth, making the efficiency trade-off questionable for most applications. The database records no scenario where the P106-090 outperforms the RTX 2060.