NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile and the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB represent two vastly different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a generational chasm. The most striking evidence comes from the head-to-head results, where the RTX 4090 Mobile utterly dominates the older Quadro in both available compute tests. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 4090 Mobile scores 180,831, a staggering 351% higher than the Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 40,098. The Vulkan test tells a similar story, with the mobile part scoring 170,774 versus 46,425, a 267.8% advantage. These are not marginal wins; they are decisive, multi-generational leaps in raw processing capability.

Beyond the direct comparisons, the overall average benchmark scores reinforce this gap. The RTX 4090 Mobile holds an average benchmark score of 43,667, which is 0.9% higher than the Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 43,262. While this aggregate delta appears small, it is important to note that the Quadro’s average is pulled up by a different set of tests. The RTX 4090 Mobile’s percentile ranking of 84 versus the Quadro’s 83 also indicates a slight overall edge, but the head-to-head results show where the true performance differential lies. The data suggests that in modern, compute-heavy workloads, the RTX 4090 Mobile is in a completely different performance class.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmarks with direct comparisons are Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, and in both, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile wins by an enormous margin. The OpenCL result is the most lopsided, with the RTX 4090 Mobile’s 180,831 score dwarfing the Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 40,098. This 351% delta indicates that the newer architecture is not just faster; it is fundamentally more efficient at executing the parallel compute tasks that OpenCL benchmarks measure. The Vulkan test shows a similar trend, where the RTX 4090 Mobile’s 170,774 score is 267.8% higher than the Quadro’s 46,425. This suggests that the RTX 4090 Mobile’s advantage is consistent across different graphics and compute APIs, not just a quirk of one test.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the RTX 4090 Mobile shows a wide range of scores, from a low of 107 in the Passmark DirectX 12 test to a high of 27,212 in the Passmark G3D test. Its Passmark GPU Compute score of 12,347 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 180,831 highlight its strength in general-purpose compute. The Quadro M6000 24 GB, by contrast, only has results for the two Geekbench tests, making it difficult to assess its performance in legacy DirectX workloads. However, the sheer magnitude of the delta in the available tests is conclusive: the RTX 4090 Mobile is between 2.7 and 4.5 times faster in these specific scenarios. The data implies that any task leveraging Vulkan or OpenCL will see a transformative performance uplift on the newer mobile GPU.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the available data, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile wins in every single head-to-head benchmark category. Its wins in OpenCL and Vulkan are absolute, leaving no room for the Quadro M6000 24 GB to claim a victory in compute or modern graphics APIs. The RTX 4090 Mobile’s 2 wins versus 0 for the Quadro makes the use-case split quite clear. For workloads that rely on OpenCL (common in scientific computing, video rendering, and some AI inference) or Vulkan (increasingly used in games and professional visualization), the RTX 4090 Mobile is the only rational choice from a performance perspective.

However, the Quadro M6000 24 GB does have a distinct advantage in memory capacity. It offers 24 GB of VRAM, which is 50% more than the RTX 4090 Mobile’s 16 GB. This means that for large datasets that need to reside entirely in VRAM—such as massive 3D scenes, high-resolution texture sets, or complex machine learning models—the Quadro might be able to handle tasks that would exceed the RTX 4090 Mobile’s memory capacity. This is not a performance win in the traditional sense, but a capacity win. The data shows no benchmark where the Quadro outperforms the RTX 4090 Mobile, so its 24 GB VRAM is its only qualitative advantage in the entire fact pack.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is immense, explaining the performance disparity. The RTX 4090 Mobile is built on the AD103 chip using the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm process node at TSMC. It packs 45,900 million transistors onto a 379 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 121.1M / mm². In contrast, the Quadro M6000 24 GB uses the GM200 chip with the Maxwell 2.0 architecture on a much older 28 nm process. It contains only 8,000 million transistors on a larger 601 mm² die, yielding a density of just 13.3M / mm². This represents a 9.1x increase in transistor density for the newer part, allowing for far more complex logic in the same space.

The core configurations differ wildly. The RTX 4090 Mobile has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, alongside 76 dedicated RT cores and 304 tensor cores. The Quadro M6000 24 GB has only 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no RT cores or tensor cores at all. This means the RTX 4090 Mobile supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI tensor operations, while the Quadro does not. The clock speeds also tell a story: the RTX 4090 Mobile boosts to 1695 MHz, while the Quadro boosts to 1114 MHz. Combined with the architectural efficiency, the RTX 4090 Mobile achieves an FP32 throughput of 32.98 TFLOPS, nearly five times the Quadro’s 6.844 TFLOPS. The memory subsystems also differ, with the RTX 4090 Mobile using 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus (576.0 GB/s bandwidth) versus the Quadro’s 24 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus (317.4 GB/s bandwidth).

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile is the superior performer in every measured benchmark. Its 351% lead in OpenCL and 267.8% lead in Vulkan are not incremental improvements; they represent a complete generational overhaul. The RTX 4090 Mobile also has a higher average benchmark score (43,667 vs 43,262) and a higher percentile rank (84 vs 83). For any user prioritizing raw compute performance, modern API support, or hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI features, the RTX 4090 Mobile is the clear choice. Its superior transistor density, higher core count, and newer architecture make it a far more capable processor.

That said, the Quadro M6000 24 GB is not without its own merits. With 24 GB of VRAM, it offers 50% more memory capacity than the RTX 4090 Mobile. For professionals with specific workloads that are memory-bound rather than compute-bound—such as rendering massive datasets that must fit into VRAM—the Quadro’s larger pool might be a deciding factor. Its launch MSRP was 4,999 USD, but the data provides no longevity or reliability metrics. The RTX 4090 Mobile is also an integrated part (IGP) with a 120 W TDP, while the Quadro is a dual-slot card requiring 250 W and a 600 W power supply, making the mobile part vastly more power-efficient. For most users, the RTX 4090 Mobile is the obvious winner; the Quadro only makes sense for a niche memory-capacity requirement.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4090 Mobile in OpenCL?

A: The GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile scores 180,831 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 351% higher than the Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 40,098.

Q: Does the Quadro M6000 24 GB win any benchmark?

A: No. Based on the head-to-head data, the RTX 4090 Mobile wins both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, giving it a 2-0 win record over the Quadro.

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The Quadro M6000 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RTX 4090 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6. The Quadro has 50% more capacity.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RTX 4090 Mobile has a transistor density of 121.1M / mm², while the Quadro M6000 24 GB has a density of 13.3M / mm². This is a 9.1x difference.

Q: Does the Quadro support ray tracing?

A: No. The Quadro M6000 24 GB has no RT cores, while the RTX 4090 Mobile has 76 RT cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures?

A: The RTX 4090 Mobile achieves 32.98 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Quadro M6000 24 GB achieves 6.844 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 45,900 million | 8,000 million |

| Die Size | 379 mm² | 601 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 121.1M / mm² | 13.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1335 MHz | 988 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1695 MHz | 1114 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 317.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 9728 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 304 | 192 |

| ROPs | 112 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 76 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 304 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 189.8 GPixel/s | 106.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 515.3 GTexel/s | 213.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 32.98 TFLOPS | 6.844 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 120 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2023-01-02 | 2016-03-04 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Launch MSRP | None | 4,999 USD |