NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 vs NVIDIA Quadro P6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 and NVIDIA Quadro P6000 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The data shows a generational chasm in raw performance, yet the Quadro P6000 retains a specific position in the professional market due to its legacy features. This analysis compares the two based strictly on benchmark results and specification data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison available in the data includes only two shared benchmark tests, and the results are decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 5090 scores 334,370, while the Quadro P6000 scores 66,382. This yields a delta of 403.7% in favor of the newer card. The margin is even larger in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the RTX 5090 posts 376,728 against the Quadro P6000’s 73,590, representing a 411.9% advantage. In both head-to-head matchups, the RTX 5090 is the winner, securing all two available wins.

These deltas are not incremental improvements; they reflect a complete paradigm shift in compute capability. The RTX 5090’s average benchmark score of 79,842 places it at the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P6000’s average of 69,986 sits at the 90th percentile. Despite the massive absolute performance gap, the percentile difference is relatively narrow, indicating that the Quadro P6000 remains a capable performer in the broader context of all GPUs, even if it is utterly outclassed by the current flagship.

Looking at the RTX 5090’s broader benchmark suite, its scores are consistently high across various APIs. It achieves 18,355 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 39,650 in Passmark G3D, and 26,756 in Passmark GPU Compute. The Quadro P6000 has no corresponding scores in these specific tests within the data, so a direct comparison is impossible. However, the RTX 5090’s nearest rivals, which include the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X, have average scores within 1.4% of its own, suggesting that its position is competitive against other high-end workstation parts, even if the Quadro P6000 is not in that immediate peer group.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark. The RTX 5090 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, using the GB202 chip fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro P6000 uses the Pascal architecture, with the GP102 chip on a 16 nm process, also from TSMC. This process node difference is a primary driver of performance and efficiency. The RTX 5090 packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 122.9M per mm². The Quadro P6000 contains only 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, with a density of 25.1M per mm². This represents a nearly five-fold increase in transistor density for the newer card.

The compute resources are similarly divergent. The RTX 5090 features 21,760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. It also includes 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The Quadro P6000 has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no RT cores or tensor cores listed. This means the Quadro P6000 lacks dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations, which are fundamental to modern graphics and compute tasks. The FP32 throughput tells the story: the RTX 5090 delivers 104.8 TFLOPS, while the Quadro P6000 manages 12.63 TFLOPS. In FP16, the difference is even more pronounced, with the RTX 5090 offering 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) compared to the Quadro P6000’s 197.4 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio).

Memory subsystems also differ significantly. The RTX 5090 uses 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, providing 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P6000 uses 24 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, yielding 432.8 GB/s. The RTX 5090 also supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Quadro P6000 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs diverge as well, with the RTX 5090 offering 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, compared to the Quadro P6000’s 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The API support reflects the newer hardware: the RTX 5090 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro P6000 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 has an average benchmark score of 79,842, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro P6000’s 69,986. This places the RTX 5090 at the 92nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P6000 is at the 90th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 5090 in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The RTX 5090 scores 376,728 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Quadro P6000 scores 73,590. This results in a delta of 411.9% in favor of the RTX 5090.

Q: Does the Quadro P6000 support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The Quadro P6000 has no RT cores listed in its specifications, whereas the RTX 5090 includes 170 RT cores dedicated to ray tracing workloads.

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

A: The RTX 5090 has a memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s using 32 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus. The Quadro P6000 has 432.8 GB/s of bandwidth using 24 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus.

Q: Are these cards from the same generation?

A: No. The RTX 5090 is from the GeForce 50 generation, based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, and was released on 2025-01-29. The Quadro P6000 is from the Quadro Pascal generation, based on Pascal architecture, and was released on 2016-09-30.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The RTX 5090 has 92,200 million transistors, while the Quadro P6000 has 11,800 million transistors. The RTX 5090 also has a higher transistor density at 122.9M per mm² versus 25.1M per mm².

The Verdict

The data presents a clear verdict for most use cases: the RTX 5090 is the superior performer by a wide margin. Its 403.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and 411.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan are not just wins; they are complete overhauls of the performance envelope. For anyone running modern DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads, the RTX 5090 is the only option with support for that API level, as the Quadro P6000 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). The RTX 5090 also brings dedicated RT cores and tensor cores, which are essential for ray-traced rendering and AI-accelerated tasks, respectively. The Quadro P6000 has neither, making it unsuitable for those specific workflows.

However, the Quadro P6000 is not without its merits in a historical context. Its 24 GB of GDDR5X memory is still substantial, and its 90th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates it remains functional for general compute tasks. Its end-of-life production status and lack of modern features like PCIe 5.0 and hardware ray tracing limit its relevance. The RTX 5090’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory, 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, and 104.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance are in a different class entirely. The RTX 5090 is also the active production card, with a successor (GeForce 60) already listed, while the Quadro P6000 is end-of-life.

For a user seeking maximum performance in current benchmarks, the choice is unambiguous. The RTX 5090 wins every head-to-head test and offers architectural features that the Quadro P6000 cannot match. The Quadro P6000 may still serve legacy applications that require its specific DVI output or do not benefit from the newer architecture’s capabilities. The data suggests that the RTX 5090 is the right choice for almost any modern workload, while the Quadro P6000 is a relic of a previous era, best suited for environments where its specific feature set is a requirement.

Specification Differences

• Chip: GB202 (RTX 5090) vs GP102 (Quadro P6000)
• Architecture: Blackwell 2.0 vs Pascal
• Process Node: 5 nm vs 16 nm
• Transistors: 92,200 million vs 11,800 million
• Die Size: 750 mm² vs 471 mm²
• Transistor Density: 122.9M / mm² vs 25.1M / mm²
• Base Clock: 2017 MHz vs 1506 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2407 MHz vs 1645 MHz
• Memory Size: 32 GB vs 24 GB
• Memory Type: GDDR7 vs GDDR5X
• Memory Bus Width: 512 bit vs 384 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 1.79 TB/s vs 432.8 GB/s
• Shading Units: 21760 vs 3840
• TMUs: 680 vs 240
• ROPs: 176 vs 96
• RT Cores: 170 vs null
• Tensor Cores: 680 vs null
• Pixel Rate: 423.6 GPixel/s vs 157.9 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 1,636.8 GTexel/s vs 394.8 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 104.8 TFLOPS vs 12.63 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 197.4 GFLOPS (1:64)
• TDP: 575 W vs 250 W
• Power Connectors: 1x 16-pin vs 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 950 W vs 600 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b vs 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX Support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_1)
• Production Status: Active vs End-of-life
• Release Date: 2025-01-29 vs 2016-09-30
• Predecessor: GeForce 40 vs Quadro Maxwell
• Successor: GeForce 60 vs Quadro Volta
• Launch MSRP: 1,999 USD vs 5,999 USD