NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro 4000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB occupy opposite ends of the GPU timeline, yet the aggregate benchmark data places them nearly neck-and-neck. The Quadro 4000 posts an average benchmark score of 4979, while the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB averages 4970, a difference of just 0.2%. Both cards sit at the 29th percentile of all GPUs. However, this statistical parity masks a stark reality: the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is the only one of the two that is currently relevant for modern workloads, while the Quadro 4000 is an end-of-life product from a bygone era.

Where Each One Wins

The data does not show a single head-to-head benchmark victory for either card. The Quadro 4000’s sole benchmark result is a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4979. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has no OpenCL score in the pack; instead, it has a suite of Passmark and 3DMark results. This makes a direct per-test comparison impossible. What the data shows is a clear division of labor by workload type, not by test.

The Quadro 4000 wins in the narrow category of legacy professional compute. Its 486.4 GFLOPS FP32 performance and 89.86 GB/s of memory bandwidth were designed for the workstation tasks of 2010. In a modern context, its 2 GB of GDDR5 memory is a hard limitation, but for running old certification suites or maintaining legacy software compatibility, the Fermi architecture still functions. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB does not win here because it is not designed for that purpose.

The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB wins everywhere that matters today. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 is its strongest showing, dwarfing its own compute score of 11224. It also produces a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4019, and Passmark DX9, DX10, DX11, and DX12 scores of 238, 144, 219, and 89 respectively. The Quadro 4000 has no comparable scores, meaning the RTX card is the only option for anyone running DirectX-based games or modern 3D applications. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB also wins on memory capacity, offering 16 GB versus the Quadro’s 2 GB, which is a decisive advantage for texture-heavy workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are separated by fifteen years of architectural evolution. The Quadro 4000 uses the GF100 chip, built on the Fermi architecture using a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 3,100 million transistors onto a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9M / mm². In contrast, the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB uses the GB206 chip, based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 5 nm process. This die is far smaller at 181 mm², yet holds 21,900 million transistors, achieving a density of 121.0M / mm² — a twenty-fold increase in density.

The core configurations are equally divergent. The Quadro 4000 has 256 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. Beyond the raw shader count, the RTX card introduces dedicated hardware that simply did not exist in Fermi: 36 RT cores for ray tracing and 144 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 23.70 TFLOPS, while the Quadro 4000 has no FP16 capability listed.

Memory technology highlights the generational leap. The Quadro uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 89.86 GB/s. The RTX card uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 448.0 GB/s — nearly five times the bandwidth despite half the bus width. The power delivery and physical design also differ: the Quadro is a single-slot, 142 W card with a 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is a dual-slot, 180 W card with an 8-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU. The bus interface moves from PCIe 2.0 x16 to PCIe 5.0 x8, and the display outputs shift from 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort to 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark results in the data, so any comparison must rely on the available scores. The single overlapping metric is the average benchmark score, where the Quadro 4000 sits at 4979 and the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB at 4970 — the Quadro leads by 0.2%. This is statistically negligible, and the nearestRivals data confirms it: each card lists the other as its closest rival, with deltaPct values of 0.2% and -0.2% respectively.

Beyond that aggregate, the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB’s specific scores paint a picture of overwhelming performance in any task it can run. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 is over 4.5 times its own GPU compute score of 11224, suggesting the card is far more optimized for rasterized graphics than for raw compute. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4019 is a modern, demanding test that the Quadro 4000 cannot even attempt. The Passmark DX9 score of 238, DX10 of 144, DX11 of 219, and DX12 of 89 show a regression in performance as API complexity increases, which is typical for a card prioritizing newer features. The Quadro 4000’s OpenCL score of 4979 is its only data point, and it cannot be compared to any of these results. The verdict is simple: the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB wins every benchmark it has a score for, and the Quadro 4000 wins only the aggregate average by a hair.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 4979, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB’s 4970. The Quadro leads by 0.2%, but this difference is within the margin of error.

Q: Does the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB includes 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores, which are dedicated to ray tracing and AI workloads. The Quadro 4000 has no such hardware, as it predates these technologies.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The Quadro 4000 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 89.86 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX card offers eight times the capacity and roughly five times the bandwidth.

Q: Can the Quadro 4000 run modern DirectX 12 Ultimate games?

A: No. The Quadro 4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The RTX card also has Vulkan 1.4 support, whereas the Quadro lists no Vulkan support at all.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 21,900 million transistors, compared to the Quadro 4000’s 3,100 million. The RTX card packs these into a smaller 181 mm² die versus the Quadro’s 529 mm², resulting in a density of 121.0M / mm² versus 5.9M / mm².

Q: Are both cards the same physical size?

A: Yes and no. Both cards have identical length (241 mm / 9.5 inches) and height (111 mm / 4.4 inches). However, the Quadro 4000 is 20 mm (0.8 inches) wide and single-slot, while the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is 40 mm (1.6 inches) wide and dual-slot.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 4000 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Chip | GF100 | GB206 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 21,900 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 181 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 121.0M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.86 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 256 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 32 | 144 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 36 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 144 |

| FP32 Performance | 486.4 GFLOPS | 23.70 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None | 23.70 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 142 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | None | 1.4 |

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

| Launch MSRP | 1,199 USD | 429 USD |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 is an end-of-life product from 2010, and its only claim to relevance is a 0.2% lead in the aggregate average benchmark score. That lead comes from a single OpenCL test and does not reflect real-world capability. The Quadro 4000 should only be selected by someone maintaining a legacy workstation that requires the specific Fermi-era feature set and cannot migrate to newer hardware. Its 2 GB memory and 486.4 GFLOPS compute are simply insufficient for any modern task.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is the card to buy for anything else. It is an active product with 16 GB of GDDR7 memory, 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, 23.70 TFLOPS FP32 performance, and dedicated RT and tensor cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, making it the only choice for gaming or modern professional 3D work. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 demonstrates strong rasterization capability, while the 3DMark Steel Nomad result of 4019 confirms it can handle contemporary DX12 loads. The 180 W TDP is modest, and the dual-slot cooler is a reasonable trade for the performance. If you are choosing between these two, the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is the only sensible option. The Quadro 4000 is a museum piece.