NVIDIA L4 vs NVIDIA Quadro P6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA L4 and NVIDIA Quadro P6000 are both 24 GB professional cards, but they belong to completely different eras of GPU design. The L4 is a modern, power-efficient server accelerator built on Ada Lovelace, while the Quadro P6000 is a legacy workstation workhorse from the Pascal generation. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, but the choice between them depends heavily on your specific workload and system constraints. Below is a breakdown of where each card excels, how their architectures differ, and what the recorded numbers actually mean for a buyer.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA L4 wins both recorded benchmarks outright, and by substantial margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the L4 scores 140,838 against the Quadro P6000’s 66,382, a 112.2% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the L4 posts 121,306 versus 73,590, a 64.8% lead. That means the L4 is more than twice as fast in OpenCL compute and roughly two-thirds faster in Vulkan graphics workloads. If your application relies on modern compute APIs like Vulkan or OpenCL, the L4 is the only rational choice.

The Quadro P6000, however, retains one practical edge: it has physical display outputs. The P6000 offers 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the L4 has no outputs at all. For a workstation where you need to drive monitors directly from the card, the P6000 is the only option here. The L4 is designed strictly for server racks, where display output is handled by a separate GPU or CPU. Additionally, the P6000’s dual-slot cooler and 250 W TDP may fit older chassis with more generous power budgets, whereas the L4’s single-slot, 72 W design is tailored for dense servers. So, the P6000 wins in legacy display integration, while the L4 wins in every performance metric recorded.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is generational. The L4 uses the AD104 chip on TSMC’s 5 nm process, packing 35,800 million transistors into a 294 mm² die. The P6000 uses the GP102 chip on TSMC’s 16 nm process, with 11,800 million transistors on a larger 471 mm² die. The L4’s transistor density is 121.8 million per mm² versus 25.1 million per mm² for the P6000, a 4.8x density advantage that explains the performance leap despite the smaller physical chip.

The L4 is built on Ada Lovelace architecture, while the P6000 is Pascal. This means the L4 has dedicated RT cores (60) and Tensor cores (240), which the P6000 lacks entirely. The L4 also has 7,424 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, compared to the P6000’s 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The L4’s shading unit count is nearly double, but its ROP count is lower, which affects pixel fill rates. The L4’s pixel rate is 163.2 GPixel/s versus 157.9 GPixel/s for the P6000, so the L4 still wins there. Texture rate is also higher on the L4: 489.6 GTexel/s versus 394.8 GTexel/s.

Memory is another major divergence. Both have 24 GB, but the L4 uses GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 300.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the P6000 uses GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 432.8 GB/s bandwidth. The P6000 has a 44% bandwidth advantage, which matters for large datasets that exceed the L4’s narrower pipe. However, the L4’s memory clock is higher at 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) versus 1127 MHz (9 Gbps effective), but the wider bus on the P6000 compensates. The L4 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the P6000 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Power consumption is starkly different. The L4 has a TDP of 72 W with no power connectors, drawing entirely from the PCIe slot, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The P6000 has a 250 W TDP, requires a single 8-pin connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU. The L4 is also a single-slot card at 169 mm length and 56 mm height, while the P6000 is dual-slot at 267 mm length and 111 mm height. The L4 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, the P6000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Finally, the L4 is still in active production, while the P6000 is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for the L4. In Geekbench OpenCL, the L4 scores 140,838 against the P6000’s 66,382, a delta of 112.2%. This is a massive margin, more than double the performance. In Geekbench Vulkan, the L4 scores 121,306 versus 73,590, a 64.8% delta. The Vulkan gap is smaller but still decisive. These numbers indicate that the L4’s modern architecture, with its higher shading unit count and faster clocks (boost 2040 MHz versus 1645 MHz), dominates raw compute and graphics throughput.

For context, the L4’s average benchmark score is 131,072, placing it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti (average 131,938, delta -0.7%), NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation (135,218, -3.1%), NVIDIA A10M (135,230, -3.1%), and AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135,396, -3.2%). This means the L4 sits right at the edge of the top 5% of GPUs, trading blows with flagship consumer and professional cards. The Quadro P6000, by contrast, has an average score of 69,986, placing it in the 90th percentile. Its nearest rivals are AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (69,870, +0.2%), NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile (70,140, -0.2%), AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829, -1.2%), and NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69,000, +1.4%). The P6000 is competitive within its own tier but is roughly half the performance of the L4.

Breaking down the individual scores, the L4’s OpenCL result of 140,838 is its strongest showing, while its Vulkan score of 121,306 is lower. The P6000 follows the opposite pattern: its Vulkan score of 73,590 is higher than its OpenCL score of 66,382. This suggests the L4 is particularly strong in compute-heavy OpenCL tasks, while the P6000 is relatively more efficient in graphics-oriented Vulkan workloads, but still far behind. The L4’s FP32 throughput is 30.29 TFLOPS versus the P6000’s 12.63 TFLOPS, a 2.4x difference that directly explains the OpenCL gap. The L4’s FP16 is 30.29 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the P6000’s FP16 is a paltry 197.4 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), meaning the L4 is over 150x faster in half-precision compute, a critical advantage for AI inference and certain scientific workloads.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA L4 is the superior card for any compute or graphics workload that uses OpenCL or Vulkan. It is more than twice as fast in OpenCL and nearly two-thirds faster in Vulkan, with a higher percentile ranking (95th versus 90th) and a significantly newer architecture. If your server rack needs a low-power, single-slot accelerator with no display output, the L4 is the only choice here. Its 72 W TDP, no external power connectors, and PCIe 4.0 support make it ideal for dense, modern servers where power and space are at a premium.

The Quadro P6000 is only preferable if you specifically need a card with display outputs for a workstation, and if your applications are old enough that they do not benefit from the L4’s newer features like RT cores, Tensor cores, or DirectX 12 Ultimate. The P6000’s higher memory bandwidth (432.8 GB/s versus 300.1 GB/s) could also matter for workloads that are purely bandwidth-bound, such as certain large dataset processing, but the L4’s raw compute advantage will likely overcome that in most cases. The P6000 is also end-of-life, so buying it today means accepting legacy hardware with no future driver optimizations. The L4 is active and supported.

In short: pick the L4 for any new deployment where compute performance and power efficiency are priorities. Pick the P6000 only if you have a legacy workstation that requires onboard display outputs and you cannot use a separate GPU for that purpose. The benchmark data gives no reason to choose the P6000 for raw performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA L4 scores 140,838 in Geekbench OpenCL, versus 66,382 for the Quadro P6000. That is a 112.2% advantage for the L4.

Q: Does the Quadro P6000 have any advantages over the L4?

A: Yes. The P6000 has display outputs (1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a) while the L4 has none. The P6000 also has higher memory bandwidth at 432.8 GB/s versus 300.1 GB/s.

Q: What is the performance percentile of each card?

A: The L4 is in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 131,072. The P6000 is in the 90th percentile, with an average score of 69,986.

Q: Can the L4 be used in a workstation with a monitor attached?

A: No. The L4 has no display outputs at all, so it cannot drive a monitor directly. The P6000, with its DVI and DisplayPort outputs, can.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The L4 has a 72 W TDP and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The P6000 has a 250 W TDP, requires one 8-pin connector, and suggests a 600 W PSU.

Q: Which card supports newer APIs?

A: The L4 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the P6000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

• Chip: L4 uses AD104; P6000 uses GP102.
• Architecture: L4 is Ada Lovelace; P6000 is Pascal.
• Process Node: L4 is 5 nm; P6000 is 16 nm (both TSMC).
• Transistors: L4 has 35,800 million; P6000 has 11,800 million.
• Die Size: L4 is 294 mm²; P6000 is 471 mm².
• Transistor Density: L4 is 121.8M / mm²; P6000 is 25.1M / mm².
• Base Clock: L4 is 795 MHz; P6000 is 1506 MHz.
• Boost Clock: L4 is 2040 MHz; P6000 is 1645 MHz.
• Memory Type: L4 is GDDR6; P6000 is GDDR5X.
• Memory Bus Width: L4 is 192 bit; P6000 is 384 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: L4 is 300.1 GB/s; P6000 is 432.8 GB/s.
• Shading Units: L4 has 7424; P6000 has 3840.
• ROPs: L4 has 80; P6000 has 96.
• RT Cores: L4 has 60; P6000 has none.
• Tensor Cores: L4 has 240; P6000 has none.
• FP32 Performance: L4 is 30.29 TFLOPS; P6000 is 12.63 TFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: L4 is 30.29 TFLOPS (1:1); P6000 is 197.4 GFLOPS (1:64).
• TDP: L4 is 72 W; P6000 is 250 W.
• Slot Width: L4 is single-slot; P6000 is dual-slot.
• Power Connectors: L4 has none; P6000 has 1x 8-pin.
• Suggested PSU: L4 is 250 W; P6000 is 600 W.
• Bus Interface: L4 is PCIe 4.0 x16; P6000 is PCIe 3.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: L4 has none; P6000 has 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• DirectX Support: L4 is 12 Ultimate (12_2); P6000 is 12 (12_1).
• Dimensions: L4 is 169 mm (6.7 inches) long, 56 mm (2.2 inches) high; P6000 is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, 111 mm (4.4 inches) high.
• Production Status: L4 is Active; P6000 is End-of-life.
• Release Date: L4 is March 2023; P6000 is September 2016.
• Launch MSRP: P6000 launched at 5,999 USD; L4 has no recorded launch MSRP.