NVIDIA PG506-232 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison recorded between the NVIDIA PG506-232 and the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The PG506-232 scores 225124 points, while the Quadro RTX 6000 manages 74179 points. That is a delta of 203.5%, meaning the PG506-232 more than triples the Quadro RTX 6000's score in this compute-oriented workload. This is not a marginal victory; it is a generational gap expressed in raw numbers.

Looking at the broader context, the PG506-232's OpenCL result places it in the 99th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Quadro RTX 6000, by contrast, sits in the 94th percentile. While both are high-performing cards, the percentile gap underscores that the PG506-232 is operating in a different performance tier. The PG506-232's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D (average score 219827, delta 2.4%) and the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 80 GB (average score 207124, delta 8.7%). It also outpaces the NVIDIA RTX 6000D (average score 195964, delta 14.9%). The only recorded rival that beats it is the NVIDIA L20, with an average score of 251147, a delta of -10.4%. So the PG506-232 is clearly among the top-tier compute accelerators, just shy of the L20 but comfortably ahead of the A100 and the Radeon PRO W7900D.

The Quadro RTX 6000's OpenCL score of 74179 is far below its own nearest rivals. The AMD Radeon RX 7900M averages 97487 (delta 4.5%), the AMD Radeon Pro VII averages 97131 (delta 4.9%), and both the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo (106750, delta -4.6%) and the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X (107342, delta -5.1%) outperform it. The data shows the Quadro RTX 6000 is not competitive in OpenCL against its contemporary peers, let alone against the newer PG506-232.

It is importantly the Quadro RTX 6000 has a second benchmark entry in its record, Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 129564. No comparable Vulkan score exists for the PG506-232 in the database, so a direct head-to-head comparison in that API cannot be made. The only recorded head-to-head test is OpenCL, and the PG506-232 wins it outright.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the PG506-232 wins the only direct comparison, so in a strict head-to-head sense it takes the compute crown. The OpenCL result is the sole metric, and the PG506-232 dominates there. Its 225124 score versus 74179 is a 203.5% advantage, which is a massive lead in any compute scenario that relies on OpenCL. This suggests the PG506-232 is the clear choice for general-purpose GPU compute workloads, such as scientific simulation, machine learning inference, or any task that leverages OpenCL for parallel processing.

The Quadro RTX 6000 does not win any recorded benchmark against the PG506-232. However, its Vulkan score of 129564 is a data point that the PG506-232 does not have. This does not mean the Quadro RTX 6000 is better in Vulkan; it simply means no direct comparison exists. In terms of architectural features, the Quadro RTX 6000 has dedicated ray tracing cores (72) and a much higher number of shading units (4608 versus 3584). It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the PG506-232 has no recorded API support in the database and no display outputs. The Quadro RTX 6000 is a workstation card with four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and one USB Type-C, making it suitable for visualization, rendering, and any workload that needs a physical display. The PG506-232 has no display outputs, so it is purely a compute accelerator.

If the workload is graphics-focused, such as real-time rendering in a workstation environment, the Quadro RTX 6000 has the feature set to support it, including ray tracing hardware and a higher texture rate (509.8 GTexel/s versus 322.6 GTexel/s). Its pixel rate is also higher at 169.9 GPixel/s versus 138.2 GPixel/s. The Quadro RTX 6000 also has a higher FP32 throughput at 16.31 TFLOPS versus 10.32 TFLOPS. This means for single-precision floating-point compute tasks that are not OpenCL-bound, the Quadro RTX 6000 could be faster, but the benchmark data does not capture this. In the recorded OpenCL test, the PG506-232 wins decisively.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the NVIDIA PG506-232 in the only direct benchmark recorded. Its OpenCL score of 225124 versus 74179 is a 203.5% improvement, and it sits in the 99th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro RTX 6000 is in the 94th. For any user whose primary metric is OpenCL compute performance, the PG506-232 is the superior choice. It also has a higher memory bandwidth (933.1 GB/s versus 672.0 GB/s), a wider memory bus (3072-bit versus 384-bit), and newer HBM2 memory versus GDDR6, though both have 24 GB of capacity. The PG506-232 is built on a 7 nm process with 54,200 million transistors, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses a 12 nm process with 18,600 million transistors. The PG506-232 is also more power-efficient in terms of performance per watt, as its TDP is 165 W versus 260 W, though the benchmark data does not directly measure efficiency.

However, the Quadro RTX 6000 is not without its own merits. It has a higher FP32 throughput (16.31 TFLOPS), more shading units (4608), and dedicated ray tracing cores, which the PG506-232 lacks entirely. It also supports modern graphics APIs and has display outputs, making it a functional workstation GPU for visualization tasks. Its launch MSRP was 6,299 USD. The PG506-232 has no recorded launch MSRP. If the workload involves interactive graphics, ray tracing, or any task that requires a display connection, the Quadro RTX 6000 is the only option of the two. But for raw compute in the form of OpenCL, the PG506-232 is overwhelmingly faster.

Who should pick which? For a server or datacenter deployment where compute density and OpenCL throughput are paramount, the PG506-232 is the clear choice. Its 99th percentile ranking and triple-digit delta over the Quadro RTX 6000 make it a top-tier accelerator. For a desktop workstation that needs both compute and display capabilities, the Quadro RTX 6000 is the viable pick, despite its lower benchmark score. The absence of display outputs on the PG506-232 is a hard limitation. The data does not support the Quadro RTX 6000 as a compute leader, but its feature set gives it a distinct role in graphics-centric environments.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA PG506-232 scores 225124, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 scores 74179. The PG506-232 leads by 203.5%.

Q: Does the Quadro RTX 6000 have any benchmark where it wins?

A: In the recorded head-to-head data, the Quadro RTX 6000 has no wins. It has a separate Vulkan score of 129564, but no corresponding PG506-232 Vulkan score exists for comparison.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: Both cards have 24 GB of memory. The PG506-232 uses HBM2 with a 3072-bit bus and 933.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 6000 uses GDDR6 with a 384-bit bus and 672.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are there display outputs on both cards?

A: No. The PG506-232 has no display outputs. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C.

Q: How do they compare in FP32 compute?

A: The Quadro RTX 6000 has a higher FP32 rating at 16.31 TFLOPS, while the PG506-232 is rated at 10.32 TFLOPS. This is not reflected in the OpenCL benchmark, which the PG506-232 wins.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The PG506-232 has a TDP of 165 W, while the Quadro RTX 6000 has a TDP of 260 W. The suggested PSU is 450 W for the PG506-232 and 600 W for the Quadro RTX 6000.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA PG506-232 is based on the GA100 chip, using the Ampere architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 54,200 million transistors on a die size of 826 mm², giving a transistor density of 65.6M per mm². The Quadro RTX 6000 uses the TU102 chip, based on the older Turing architecture, on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It has 18,600 million transistors on a 754 mm² die, for a density of 24.7M per mm². The PG506-232 is a denser, more modern chip.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The PG506-232 has a base clock of 930 MHz and a boost clock of 1440 MHz. The Quadro RTX 6000 runs at a base of 1440 MHz and boosts to 1770 MHz. Despite the lower clocks, the PG506-232 achieves a higher OpenCL score, likely due to its architecture and memory subsystem. The memory clock on the PG506-232 is 1215 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective), while the Quadro RTX 6000 runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The compute resources are structured differently. The PG506-232 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 224 tensor cores. It has no ray tracing cores. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 4608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 72 ray tracing cores, and 576 tensor cores. The Quadro RTX 6000 has more of everything except for the absence of a direct comparison in tensor core architecture. The PG506-232's FP16 performance is 10.32 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Quadro RTX 6000's FP16 is 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), indicating the Quadro can double its FP16 throughput.

The PG506-232 is a server-class card with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The PG506-232 has no display outputs, reinforcing its compute-only role. The Quadro RTX 6000 has a full suite of display outputs, including 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the PG506-232 has no recorded API support. The Quadro RTX 6000 is a dual-slot card with a 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connector setup, while the PG506-232 uses a single 8-pin EPS connector. Both are dual-slot and 267 mm long, but the Quadro RTX 6000 is 111 mm tall versus 112 mm for the PG506-232. The PG506-232 is from the Server Ampere generation, released in April 2021, while the Quadro RTX 6000 is from the Quadro Turing generation, released in August 2018. Both are end-of-life products.