NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 and NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB represent two distinct eras of professional workstation graphics. The RTX A6000, built on the Ampere architecture, is a modern compute powerhouse, while the Quadro M6000, from the Maxwell 2.0 generation, is a legacy card from a pre-AI-compute era. Benchmark data shows a generational chasm between the two, with the RTX A6000 delivering dramatically higher raw performance, yet the M6000 remains a capable baseline for older workloads. This analysis will break down the architectural shift, benchmark deltas, and specification differences that define their respective positions in the professional GPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX A6000 in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A6000 scores 193,937, which is 383.7% higher than the Quadro M6000's score of 40,098. This massive delta indicates the RTX A6000 is vastly superior for general-purpose GPU computing tasks.

Q: Is the Quadro M6000 competitive in any modern benchmark?

A: The data shows no. The RTX A6000 wins both head-to-head benchmark tests. In Geekbench Vulkan, the A6000 scores 164,462 compared to the M6000's 46,425, a 254.3% advantage for the newer card.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The RTX A6000 features 48 GB of GDDR6 memory with a bandwidth of 768.0 GB/s. The Quadro M6000 is equipped with 24 GB of GDDR5 memory and a bandwidth of 317.4 GB/s. The A6000 doubles the capacity and more than doubles the bandwidth.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RTX A6000 has an average benchmark score of 44,075, which is 1.8% higher than the Quadro M6000's average score of 43,301. This places both cards in a similar overall performance percentile, at 84 and 83 respectively.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both the NVIDIA RTX A6000 and the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB have a production status of "End-of-life." The RTX A6000 was released in 2020, while the M6000 was released earlier in 2016.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The RTX A6000's GA102 chip contains 28,300 million transistors on an 8 nm process. The Quadro M6000's GM200 chip has 8,000 million transistors on a 28 nm process. This represents a 3.5x increase in transistor count for the newer card.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is profound. The RTX A6000 is built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process at Samsung, while the Quadro M6000 uses the older Maxwell 2.0 architecture on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This node transition allowed the A6000 to pack 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 45.1M per mm². In contrast, the M6000's GM200 chip houses 8,000 million transistors on a similar-sized 601 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of 13.3M per mm².

This generational leap brings massive compute feature changes. The RTX A6000 is equipped with 84 RT cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and 336 Tensor cores for AI and deep learning workloads. The Quadro M6000 has no RT cores or Tensor cores, meaning it lacks dedicated hardware for these modern tasks. The A6000's shader configuration is also drastically different, with 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, compared to the M6000's 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The A6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and has a Vulkan version of 1.4, while the M6000 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1) with the same Vulkan 1.4 support. The A6000 also includes newer display outputs, offering 4x DisplayPort 1.4a versus the M6000's older 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 configuration.

Clock speeds and memory technology further separate the two. The RTX A6000 has a base clock of 1410 MHz and a boost clock of 1800 MHz, with memory running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The Quadro M6000 is slower, with a base clock of 988 MHz and a boost of 1114 MHz, and its GDDR5 memory operates at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective). The A6000 uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, whereas the M6000 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The performance gap is stark and consistent. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A6000 achieves a score of 193,937, crushing the Quadro M6000's 40,098. This results in a 383.7% delta in favor of the A6000, the largest performance discrepancy in the entire data set. This specific benchmark highlights the A6000's immense FP32 compute throughput of 38.71 TFLOPS versus the M6000's 6.844 TFLOPS.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a similar, though slightly less extreme, outcome. The RTX A6000 scores 164,462, while the Quadro M6000 scores 46,425. This gives the A6000 a 254.3% lead. While Vulkan performance is not as starkly divergent as OpenCL, it still underscores the A6000's dominance in modern graphics APIs. The M6000 fails to win a single head-to-head benchmark, with a final win tally of 0 for the M6000 and 2 for the A6000.

It is important to note that the overall average benchmark scores are much closer. The RTX A6000's average score of 44,075 is only 1.8% higher than the Quadro M6000's 43,301. In fact, the M6000's nearest rival list includes the RTX 5050 Mobile with a 0% delta and the RTX 4070 SUPER with a 0.1% delta, indicating that the M6000's average is competitive with modern mid-range mobile and desktop parts. This suggests that while the M6000 falls far behind in specific compute tests, its overall performance profile is still relevant for some tasks, though the A6000 remains firmly ahead.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal a clear progression in every key metric. The most obvious difference is memory: the RTX A6000 offers 48 GB of GDDR6, while the Quadro M6000 provides 24 GB of GDDR5. The bus width is identical at 384 bits, but the memory bandwidth tells a different story—768.0 GB/s for the A6000 versus 317.4 GB/s for the M6000. The A6000's 16 Gbps effective memory speed is more than double the M6000's 6.6 Gbps.

Compute units show the A6000's advantage. The A6000 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, with 84 RT cores and 336 Tensor cores. The M6000 is limited to 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no RT or Tensor cores. Pixel and texture rates follow suit, with the A6000 achieving 201.6 GPixel/s and 604.8 GTexel/s, compared to the M6000's 106.9 GPixel/s and 213.9 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 38.71 TFLOPS for the A6000, while the M6000 manages only 6.844 TFLOPS; the A6000 also offers FP16 at 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1), while the M6000 has no FP16 data.

Power and connectivity also differ. The A6000 has a TDP of 300 W with an 8-pin EPS power connector, while the M6000 has a 250 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 700 W for the A6000 and 600 W for the M6000. Both are dual-slot cards with identical lengths of 267 mm, but the A6000 is slightly taller at 112 mm versus the M6000's 111 mm. The A6000 utilizes PCIe 4.0, while the M6000 is on PCIe 3.0. The launch MSRP for the RTX A6000 was 4,649 USD, while the Quadro M6000 launched at 4,999 USD.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior card in nearly every measurable way. With a 383.7% lead in OpenCL and a 254.3% lead in Vulkan, it is the only choice for professionals requiring maximum compute performance, AI acceleration via Tensor cores, or real-time ray tracing via RT cores. The A6000’s 48 GB of memory and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for massive datasets and high-resolution rendering, far exceeding the M6000's 24 GB and 317.4 GB/s. Its 1.8% higher average benchmark score, while modest, reinforces its overall edge.

The Quadro M6000 is not without a place, but its role is strictly legacy. Its average benchmark score of 43,301 places it within 0.9% of the RTX 4090 Mobile and 0.1% of the RTX 4070 SUPER, showing that it can still hold its own in general compute tasks. However, its lack of RT and Tensor cores, lower memory bandwidth, and older architecture mean it cannot handle modern AI or ray-traced workloads. The M6000’s 83rd percentile ranking is commendable for a 2016-era card, but it is firmly outclassed by the A6000's 84th percentile ranking.

For any new deployment or upgrade, the RTX A6000 is the clear winner. Professionals working with AI inference, complex simulations, or high-resolution video editing should select the A6000 without hesitation. The M6000 should be reserved for systems with legacy software dependencies or where the 250 W TDP and older power connector are a fit. The benchmark results indicate that while the M6000 remains a functional workstation card, the A6000 is a generational leap that redefines what is possible in a single-GPU workstation.