NVIDIA Quadro K6000 vs NVIDIA TITAN Xp Comparison

The benchmark data positions the NVIDIA TITAN Xp as the clear performance leader over the NVIDIA Quadro K6000, with decisive wins in every shared test. The TITAN Xp’s average benchmark score of 19,177 places it in the 64th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro K6000’s 19,030 average lands in the 63rd percentile. These overall figures are close, but the head-to-head results reveal a massive gap in modern compute workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two tests shared by both cards are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the TITAN Xp dominates both. In OpenCL, the TITAN Xp scores 72,585 against the Quadro K6000’s 23,749, a 205.6% advantage. This is not a marginal lead; it is a 3x performance difference in raw compute throughput. The Vulkan test is even more lopsided: the TITAN Xp posts 87,180 versus 25,409, a 243.1% delta. These results indicate the TITAN Xp is more than twice as fast in GPU-accelerated workloads that leverage modern APIs.

The Quadro K6000 has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data — winsA is 2, winsB is 0. This means every measurable comparison favors the TITAN Xp. The TITAN Xp’s additional benchmark results (not shared with the K6000) further illustrate its strengths: it scores 18,750 in Passmark G3D, 9,430 in Passmark GPU Compute, and 871 in Passmark G2D. For context, the TITAN Xp’s nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 780 (average score 19,164, delta 0.1%), the Tesla K20m (19,089, delta 0.5%), and the GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19,049, delta 0.7%). The Quadro K6000’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (19,036, delta 0%) and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18,954, delta 0.4%). Both cards sit in the same performance tier on average, but the TITAN Xp’s peak scores in specific tests are far higher.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN Xp wins in every workload category where data exists. In compute-heavy tasks, its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are more than double the K6000’s, making it the obvious choice for GPU compute, scientific simulation, or any workload that stresses FP32 throughput. The TITAN Xp’s Passmark DirectX results — 119 in DX10, 152 in DX11, 69 in DX12, and 226 in DX9 — cover a range of legacy and modern graphics APIs, while the K6000 lacks these tests entirely in the data. For gaming or real-time graphics, the TITAN Xp’s higher shading unit count (3840 vs 2880) and faster clock speeds (1405 MHz base, 1582 MHz boost vs 797 MHz base, 902 MHz boost) translate to better frame rates, although no gaming-specific benchmark is provided.

The Quadro K6000’s only distinct advantage is its Geekbench Metal score of 7,932, a test the TITAN Xp does not appear in. This suggests the K6000 has some capability in Apple ecosystem Metal workloads, but it is a niche scenario. The K6000 also has a lower TDP of 225 W versus 250 W, making it slightly more power-efficient in absolute terms, but this does not offset the performance deficit. The K6000’s display outputs (2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2) differ from the TITAN Xp’s (1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), but neither card’s output configuration is a performance metric.

The Verdict

Choose the NVIDIA TITAN Xp if your priority is raw compute performance. The data shows a 205.6% lead in OpenCL and a 243.1% lead in Vulkan over the Quadro K6000. The TITAN Xp’s 12.15 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is more than double the K6000’s 5.196 TFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 547.6 GB/s far exceeds the K6000’s 288.4 GB/s. For any modern workload — machine learning inference, video rendering, or high-resolution gaming — the TITAN Xp is the superior choice.

Choose the Quadro K6000 only if you have a specific requirement for its Metal benchmark score (7,932) or need its 2x DVI outputs for legacy display hardware. The K6000’s 12 GB GDDR5 memory matches the TITAN Xp’s capacity, but the TITAN Xp uses faster GDDR5X memory. The K6000’s lower TDP (225 W vs 250 W) and lower suggested PSU (550 W vs 600 W) make it marginally easier to integrate into a power-constrained system, but this is a minor consideration given the performance gap. The K6000’s launch MSRP was 5,265 USD, while the TITAN Xp’s was 1,199 USD; the data does not support any scenario where the K6000’s higher price is justified by performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN Xp has an average benchmark score of 19,177, while the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 has an average of 19,030. The TITAN Xp’s score is 147 points higher, a difference of approximately 0.8%.

Q: How much faster is the TITAN Xp in Vulkan compute?

A: The TITAN Xp scores 87,180 in Geekbench Vulkan, compared to the Quadro K6000’s 25,409. This is a 243.1% advantage for the TITAN Xp.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory capacity?

A: Yes, both cards have 12 GB of memory. However, the TITAN Xp uses GDDR5X with 547.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro K6000 uses GDDR5 with 288.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The TITAN Xp has 11,800 million transistors on a 16 nm process, while the Quadro K6000 has 7,080 million transistors on a 28 nm process. The TITAN Xp’s smaller node allows for a higher transistor density of 25.1M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm².

Q: Which card supports a newer Vulkan version?

A: The TITAN Xp supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K6000 supports Vulkan 1.2.175. The TITAN Xp also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the K6000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Quadro K6000 wins?

A: In the provided head-to-head data, the Quadro K6000 has zero wins. The only unique benchmark it appears in is Geekbench Metal with a score of 7,932, which the TITAN Xp does not have a comparable result for.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The TITAN Xp uses the GP102 chip on the Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It contains 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.1M per mm². The Quadro K6000 uses the GK110B chip on the Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 7,080 million transistors on a larger 561 mm² die, with a lower transistor density of 12.6M per mm².

The TITAN Xp has 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The Quadro K6000 has 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and only 48 ROPs. The TITAN Xp’s pixel rate is 151.9 GPixel/s, nearly three times the K6000’s 54.12 GPixel/s. Its texture rate is 379.7 GTexel/s versus 216.5 GTexel/s. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The TITAN Xp supports FP16 at 189.8 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), while the K6000 has no FP16 support listed.

The TITAN Xp’s memory subsystem uses GDDR5X at 11.4 Gbps effective, delivering 547.6 GB/s bandwidth over a 384-bit bus. The Quadro K6000 uses GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective, delivering 288.4 GB/s over the same 384-bit bus. The TITAN Xp’s base clock is 1405 MHz with a boost of 1582 MHz, while the K6000 runs at 797 MHz base and 902 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the architecture improvements, explains the massive performance gap in compute benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences are as follows. Process node: 16 nm (TITAN Xp) vs 28 nm (K6000). Transistors: 11,800 million vs 7,080 million. Die size: 471 mm² vs 561 mm². Transistor density: 25.1M / mm² vs 12.6M / mm². Base clock: 1405 MHz vs 797 MHz. Boost clock: 1582 MHz vs 902 MHz. Memory clock: 1426 MHz (11.4 Gbps effective) vs 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). Memory type: GDDR5X vs GDDR5. Memory bandwidth: 547.6 GB/s vs 288.4 GB/s. Shading units: 3840 vs 2880. ROPs: 96 vs 48. Pixel rate: 151.9 GPixel/s vs 54.12 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 379.7 GTexel/s vs 216.5 GTexel/s. FP32: 12.15 TFLOPS vs 5.196 TFLOPS. FP16: 189.8 GFLOPS vs none. TDP: 250 W vs 225 W. Power connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs 2x 6-pin. Suggested PSU: 600 W vs 550 W. Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a vs 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2. DirectX support: 12 (12_1) vs 12 (11_1). Vulkan support: 1.4 vs 1.2.175. Release date: 2017-04-05 vs 2013-07-22. Both cards are dual-slot, 267 mm long, and end-of-life. The TITAN Xp measures 112 mm in height and 40 mm in width, while the K6000 is 111 mm in height with no width listed.