NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB vs NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB and the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile represent two very different answers to the question of professional graphics. The M6000 is a dual-slot desktop behemoth from the Maxwell era, while the A500 is a low-power mobile chip built on the modern Ampere architecture. The benchmark data shows a split decision: the A500 wins the OpenCL test, but the M6000 dominates in Vulkan. This analysis breaks down where each card excels, their architectural differences, and which one is the right choice for specific workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results paint a clear picture of two specialized tools. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile takes the win in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 41,263 against the M6000's 40,098, a delta of 2.8% in its favor. This suggests the A500 has an edge in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, likely benefiting from its newer architecture and features like dedicated Tensor and RT cores that can accelerate certain workloads.

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is the clear victor in Geekbench Vulkan, posting a score of 46,425 compared to the A500's 37,873. This is a substantial 22.6% advantage for the M6000. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API, and the M6000's massive raw throughput—with 3072 shading units and a 384-bit memory bus—gives it a significant edge in rendering tasks that stress raw fill rate and memory bandwidth.

In terms of overall average benchmark score, the M6000 leads with 43,262 points, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs. The A500 trails with an average of 39,568 points, landing in the 82nd percentile. While the M6000 has a higher peak performance in one test, the A500's consistency across both tests narrows the gap in the overall average. The M6000's closest rivals are the GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (0% delta) and the RTX 4070 SUPER (0.1% delta), while the A500 is closely matched with AMD's Radeon Pro 575 (0% delta) and Radeon Pro WX 7100 (-1.2% delta).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures, separated by nearly a decade of process technology. The Quadro M6000 uses the GM200 chip on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 8,000 million transistors into a massive 601 mm² die. In contrast, the RTX A500 uses the GA107S chip on the Ampere architecture, built on Samsung's 8 nm process. It contains 8,700 million transistors in a much smaller 200 mm² die, resulting in a far higher transistor density of 43.5M / mm² versus the M6000's 13.3M / mm².

The memory subsystems are radically different. The M6000 offers 24 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 317.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The A500 has only 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. While the A500 uses faster memory (12 Gbps effective vs 6.6 Gbps), its narrow bus severely limits total bandwidth. The M6000's advantage here is massive, with over three times the memory capacity and bandwidth.

The feature sets reflect their respective generations. The M6000 is a pure rasterization engine with 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. It has no dedicated RT or Tensor cores, as those did not exist in the Maxwell architecture. The A500, while having fewer shading units (2048), TMUs (64), and ROPs (32), introduces 16 RT cores and 64 Tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features. The A500 also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (6.296 TFLOPS), while the M6000 has no listed FP16 capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark results show how differently these GPUs scale with API choice. In Geekbench Vulkan, the M6000's victory is decisive. Its score of 46,425 is 22.6% higher than the A500's 37,873. This is the M6000's strongest showing, and it highlights the card's raw power in a modern graphics API. The M6000's 106.9 GPixel/s pixel rate and 213.9 GTexel/s texture rate are more than double the A500's figures (49.18 GPixel/s and 98.37 GTexel/s), which likely explains this dominance. The M6000's 6.844 TFLOPS of FP32 performance also exceeds the A500's 6.296 TFLOPS.

The Geekbench OpenCL result flips the script. The A500 wins with 41,263 points against the M6000's 40,098, a 2.8% margin. This is a narrow victory, but it is significant given the M6000's higher theoretical FP32 throughput. The A500's advantage here likely comes from its newer architecture, which includes Tensor cores that can accelerate certain compute workloads, and its support for FP16 at full rate, which can be leveraged in OpenCL applications. The A500's lower power draw (30 W vs 250 W) also suggests it can sustain higher clocks for longer in thermally constrained environments, as its boost clock of 1537 MHz is substantially higher than the M6000's 1114 MHz.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more raw computing power?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has a higher FP32 performance at 6.844 TFLOPS compared to the RTX A500 Mobile's 6.296 TFLOPS. However, the A500 matches this with its FP16 performance, which is also 6.296 TFLOPS, a feature the M6000 lacks.

Q: Is the RTX A500 Mobile good for gaming?

A: While the data does not include gaming benchmarks, the A500's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and its dedicated RT and Tensor cores suggest it is more feature-complete for modern gaming workloads. The M6000 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and lacks hardware ray tracing.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card have?

A: The Quadro M6000 has a massive advantage here with 317.4 GB/s of bandwidth from its 384-bit GDDR5 interface. The RTX A500 Mobile is limited to 96.00 GB/s due to its 64-bit GDDR6 bus.

Q: Which card is better for compute workloads?

A: It depends on the API. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A500 Mobile wins with a score of 41,263. However, the Quadro M6000 wins decisively in Geekbench Vulkan with 46,425 points, suggesting it is better for Vulkan-based compute tasks.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both cards are listed as "End-of-life" in the production status. The Quadro M6000 was released in March 2016, while the RTX A500 Mobile was released in March 2022.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Quadro M6000 has a TDP of 250 W and requires a dual-slot cooler with a 1x 8-pin power connector. The RTX A500 Mobile is an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) with a TDP of just 30 W and requires no power connectors.

Specification Differences

Here are the key specifications where the two cards differ:

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB | NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 601 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.3M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 988 MHz | 832 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1114 MHz | 1537 MHz |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 317.4 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3072 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 192 | 64 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | None | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 106.9 GPixel/s | 49.18 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 213.9 GTexel/s | 98.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 6.844 TFLOPS | 6.296 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None listed | 6.296 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Release Date | March 2016 | March 2022 |

The Verdict

The data shows that the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is the superior choice for graphics-heavy workloads that utilize the Vulkan API. Its 22.6% lead in Vulkan performance, combined with its massive 24 GB memory buffer and 317.4 GB/s bandwidth, makes it a powerful tool for large-scale rendering, complex 3D scenes, and high-resolution texture work. The fact that it is the older card is irrelevant here; its raw throughput is unmatched in this comparison. It sits in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, outperforming its average score rival, the GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile.

The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is the better pick for those prioritizing compute tasks that run on OpenCL and need modern features. Its 2.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, hardware ray tracing, and Tensor cores, makes it a more versatile and future-proof option. Its extremely low 30 W TDP and compact IGP form factor mean it can be integrated into mobile workstations without the power and cooling requirements of the M6000. This makes it the more practical choice for on-the-go professionals who need accelerated compute without the bulk.

Ultimately, the choice is clear. If you need maximum graphics performance and memory capacity in a stationary workstation, the Quadro M6000 24 GB is the data-backed winner. If you need a low-power, feature-rich mobile GPU for OpenCL compute and modern API support, the RTX A500 Mobile is the superior option. The M6000 wins the overall average benchmark score, but the A500's architectural advantages make it the more balanced and modern card.