NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation records an average benchmark score of 184,664, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 records 101,872. That places the RTX 5000 Ada in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 94th percentile for the Quadro RTX 6000.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 5000 Ada in OpenCL?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 5000 Ada scores 175,286 versus 74,179 for the Quadro RTX 6000, a delta of 136.3%. This is the single largest performance gap between the two cards in the recorded data.

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

A: The RTX 5000 Ada has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 672.0 GB/s. The Quadro has higher bandwidth, but the RTX 5000 Ada has more capacity.

Q: Which card is built on a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. Transistor counts reflect this: 76,300 million for the RTX 5000 Ada versus 18,600 million for the Quadro RTX 6000.

Q: What are the production statuses of the two cards?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada is listed as Active, while the Quadro RTX 6000 is End-of-life. The RTX 5000 Ada was released in August 2023, whereas the Quadro RTX 6000 was released in August 2018.

Q: How does the RTX 5000 Ada compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 5000 Ada sits 0.5% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB, 1.4% above the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, 3.7% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 D, and 1.3% below the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 40 GB. The Quadro RTX 6000 sits 4.5% above the AMD Radeon RX 7900M, 4.9% above the AMD Radeon Pro VII, 4.6% below the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, and 5.1% below the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X.

Architecture Differences

The two cards belong to different architectural generations. The RTX 5000 Ada is based on the AD102 chip using Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro RTX 6000 uses the TU102 chip with Turing architecture, also from TSMC but on a 12 nm process. This process gap is central to the performance difference: the RTX 5000 Ada packs 76,300 million transistors into a 609 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 125.3 million per mm². The Quadro RTX 6000 contains 18,600 million transistors on a larger 754 mm² die, with a density of 24.7 million per mm². That is roughly a fivefold density advantage for the newer part.

The compute resources differ sharply. The RTX 5000 Ada has 12,800 shading units, 400 texture mapping units, 176 ROPs, 100 RT cores, and 400 tensor cores. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 72 RT cores, and 576 tensor cores. The RTX 5000 Ada has far more shaders, TMUs, and ROPs, while the Quadro RTX 6000 has more tensor cores by count, though the Ada tensor cores are from a newer architecture generation.

Clock behavior also differs. The RTX 5000 Ada runs at a base clock of 1155 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz. The Quadro RTX 6000 runs at 1440 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost. The Quadro starts higher but boosts much lower. Memory clocks likewise diverge: the RTX 5000 Ada uses 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

The memory subsystem is a notable architectural split. The RTX 5000 Ada uses a 256-bit bus with 32 GB, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses a 384-bit bus with 24 GB. The wider bus gives the Quadro higher raw bandwidth at 672.0 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s, but the Ada card provides more total memory. Both use GDDR6.

Feature support is largely identical at the API level: both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are dual-slot designs with a 267 mm length and 112 mm height for the RTX 5000 Ada versus 111 mm height for the Quadro RTX 6000. Display outputs differ slightly: the RTX 5000 Ada has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro RTX 6000 adds a USB Type-C port alongside its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Power delivery also differs. The RTX 5000 Ada uses a single 16-pin connector with a 250 W TDP. The Quadro RTX 6000 uses a 6-pin plus 8-pin configuration with a 260 W TDP. Both recommend a 600 W power supply. The bus interface changes as well: the RTX 5000 Ada uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

The data is one-sided in raw compute. The RTX 5000 Ada wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with a 136.3% lead in OpenCL and a 49.8% lead in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 184,664 is 81.3% higher than the Quadro RTX 6000's 101,872. The RTX 5000 Ada also ranks in the 98th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 94th percentile for the Quadro RTX 6000.

The Quadro RTX 6000 retains one technical advantage: memory bandwidth. Its 672.0 GB/s exceeds the RTX 5000 Ada's 576.0 GB/s, and its 384-bit bus is wider. That may matter for specific bandwidth-bound workloads, and the recorded data does not isolate that scenario. However, for general compute, the RTX 5000 Ada is decisively ahead.

Who should pick the RTX 5000 Ada? Users who need more memory capacity, 32 GB versus 24 GB, and who prioritize raw FP32 throughput, 65.28 TFLOPS versus 16.31 TFLOPS. The card also brings higher pixel and texture rates, 448.8 GPixel/s and 1,020.0 GTexel/s versus 169.9 GPixel/s and 509.8 GTexel/s.

Who should pick the Quadro RTX 6000? Users whose workloads are heavily bandwidth-sensitive and who specifically need the wider 384-bit memory interface. The card also has a higher base clock, 1440 MHz versus 1155 MHz, and a USB Type-C display output, which the RTX 5000 Ada lacks. It is also end-of-life, so availability may be limited.

The production status is decisive for new purchases. The RTX 5000 Ada is Active; the Quadro RTX 6000 is End-of-life. The RTX 5000 Ada also has a more modern PCIe 4.0 interface. For most workloads, the recorded benchmark data points squarely to the RTX 5000 Ada.

Specification Differences

The RTX 5000 Ada and Quadro RTX 6000 differ across nearly every major specification. The RTX 5000 Ada uses the AD102 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm process, while the Quadro RTX 6000 uses TU102 with Turing architecture on a 12 nm process. Transistor count is 76,300 million versus 18,600 million. Die size is 609 mm² versus 754 mm².

Compute units: the RTX 5000 Ada has 12,800 shading units, 400 TMUs, 176 ROPs, 100 RT cores, and 400 tensor cores. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 72 RT cores, and 576 tensor cores. Clock speeds: the RTX 5000 Ada has a 1155 MHz base and 2550 MHz boost, versus 1440 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost for the Quadro.

Memory: the RTX 5000 Ada has 32 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s. The Quadro RTX 6000 has 24 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s. Memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for the RTX 5000 Ada, versus 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective for the Quadro.

Throughput rates: the RTX 5000 Ada reaches 448.8 GPixel/s pixel rate and 1,020.0 GTexel/s texture rate. The Quadro RTX 6000 reaches 169.9 GPixel/s and 509.8 GTexel/s. FP32 is 65.28 TFLOPS for the Ada card versus 16.31 TFLOPS for the Quadro. FP16 is 65.28 TFLOPS (1:1) for the Ada card versus 32.62 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Quadro.

Power and connectors: the RTX 5000 Ada has a 250 W TDP and a single 16-pin connector. The Quadro RTX 6000 has a 260 W TDP and a 6-pin plus 8-pin connector. Both recommend a 600 W PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for the Ada card versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Quadro.

Physical and output differences: the RTX 5000 Ada is 267 mm long and 112 mm high with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Quadro RTX 6000 is 267 mm long and 111 mm high with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C. Both are dual-slot.

Status and release: the RTX 5000 Ada is Active with an August 2023 release. The Quadro RTX 6000 is End-of-life with an August 2018 release. The Quadro RTX 6000 has a launch MSRP of 6,299 USD. The RTX 5000 Ada has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Two recorded benchmarks cover both cards. The first is Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX 5000 Ada scores 175,286, and the Quadro RTX 6000 scores 74,179. The delta is 136.3% in favor of the RTX 5000 Ada. This is the largest margin in the head-to-head set. The OpenCL result reflects the massive gap in shading units, 12,800 versus 4,608, and the FP32 throughput difference, 65.28 TFLOPS versus 16.31 TFLOPS.

The second test is Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 5000 Ada scores 194,041, and the Quadro RTX 6000 scores 129,564. The delta is 49.8% in favor of the RTX 5000 Ada. The Vulkan gap is smaller than OpenCL, but still substantial. Notably, the RTX 5000 Ada's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, 194,041 versus 175,286, while the Quadro RTX 6000 also improves in Vulkan, 129,564 versus 74,179. Both cards show better Vulkan performance, but the RTX 5000 Ada maintains a clear lead.

The average benchmark score reinforces the head-to-head results. The RTX 5000 Ada averages 184,664, while the Quadro RTX 6000 averages 101,872. That is an 82,792 point gap. The RTX 5000 Ada's nearest rival, the A100 SXM4 80 GB, sits at 183,725, just 0.5% below. The Quadro RTX 6000's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, sits at 106,750, which is 4.6% above the Quadro. This places the RTX 5000 Ada in a higher competitive tier entirely.

The RTX 5000 Ada wins both head-to-head tests, giving it 2 wins and 0 losses. Its percentile ranking, 98 versus 94, aligns with the score gap. The Vulkan test shows the smallest margin between the two cards, but even that is a 49.8% difference, meaning the RTX 5000 Ada delivers nearly 1.5 times the Quadro's Vulkan performance.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5000 Ada wins every recorded benchmark. Its largest advantage is in OpenCL, where it leads by 136.3%, a margin driven by the 5 nm process, the far higher shading unit count, and the 4x FP32 throughput. For OpenCL-heavy compute workloads, the RTX 5000 Ada is the clear choice. The Vulkan advantage is smaller at 49.8%, but still decisive. Users running Vulkan-based rendering or compute should expect the RTX 5000 Ada to deliver roughly 1.5 times the performance of the Quadro RTX 6000.

The RTX 5000 Ada also wins on memory capacity. Its 32 GB is 8 GB more than the Quadro's 24 GB. That extra capacity matters for large datasets, high-resolution textures, or models that approach the 24 GB limit. The Ada card also has a faster memory clock, 2250 MHz versus 1750 MHz, and higher effective speed, 18 Gbps versus 14 Gbps.

The Quadro RTX 6000 has one clear area of advantage: memory bandwidth. Its 672.0 GB/s exceeds the RTX 5000 Ada's 576.0 GB/s by 96.0 GB/s. The wider 384-bit bus is the reason. For workloads that are purely bandwidth-bound and do not require the Ada card's extra compute capacity, the Quadro could hold an edge. The recorded benchmarks do not include a bandwidth-specific test, so this remains a theoretical advantage.

The Quadro RTX 6000 also offers a USB Type-C display output, which the RTX 5000 Ada lacks. Its base clock is higher, 1440 MHz versus 1155 MHz, though the boost clock is much lower, 1770 MHz versus 2550 MHz. The Quadro has more tensor cores by count, 576 versus 400, though the Ada tensor cores are from a newer generation. For FP16 workloads, the Quadro's 2:1 ratio gives 32.62 TFLOPS, still less than the RTX 5000 Ada's 65.28 TFLOPS at 1:1.

The production status is a practical factor. The RTX 5000 Ada is Active, while the Quadro RTX 6000 is End-of-life. New system builds should favor the Ada card. The Quadro RTX 6000's only recorded advantages are bandwidth, the USB Type-C port, and a higher base clock. The benchmark data shows the RTX 5000 Ada winning both tests, with an average score 81.3% higher. For nearly all use cases, the RTX 5000 Ada is the stronger option.