GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 and NVIDIA RTX A6000 represent two distinct eras of professional workstation graphics, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear generational leap, but the specifics matter: the Quadro M6000 holds a slim edge in one aggregate metric, while the RTX A6000 dominates the actual compute and graphics workloads measured. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architectural shifts, and use-case implications, relying solely on the provided fact pack.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is stark, with the RTX A6000 winning both recorded tests decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A6000 scores 180,149 against the Quadro M6000’s 39,510, a delta of -78.1% from the perspective of the older card. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a 4.56x raw score advantage, indicating a fundamental shift in compute throughput. The Vulkan result tells a similar story, with the RTX A6000 posting 165,451 versus 47,116 for the Quadro M6000, a -71.5% delta. Here, the newer card is roughly 3.51x faster, which reflects not only more shading units but also architectural support for modern API features that the Maxwell card lacks.

These two tests are the only head-to-head entries, and the RTX A6000 wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in wins. The Quadro M6000 records zero wins in this dataset. Yet the aggregate picture is slightly more nuanced. The Quadro M6000’s average benchmark score across all its recorded tests is 43,313, while the RTX A6000’s average is 42,653. That places the Quadro M6000 1.5% ahead of the RTX A6000 in the nearestRivals listing, a curious inversion of the head-to-head results. The explanation lies in the benchmark composition: the Quadro M6000 only has two Geekbench scores (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the RTX A6000 has nine scores, including several Passmark tests (DirectX 10, 11, 12, 9, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute) that drag its average down. For instance, the RTX A6000’s Passmark DirectX 12 score is just 87, and its DirectX 10 score is 155, which are low absolute numbers that pull the mean toward the 42,653 figure. The Quadro M6000, lacking those legacy DirectX tests, benefits from a smaller sample.

Looking at the nearestRivals data, both cards sit at the 84th percentile among all GPUs, meaning they are in the same performance tier relative to the broader market. The RTX A6000’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE, which scores 42,723 and is 0.2% ahead, while the Quadro M6000’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile at 43,667, which is 0.8% ahead. The two cards themselves are within 1.5% of each other in average score, which is statistically insignificant for aggregate benchmarks but irrelevant when comparing the specific workloads where the RTX A6000 excels. The Geekbench Vulkan test, for example, shows the RTX A6000 at 165,451, which is over 3.5x the Quadro M6000’s 47,116, and that gap dwarfs any aggregate delta.

A critical observation is the variance in the RTX A6000’s own benchmark scores. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 180,149 is nearly 4.2x its Passmark G3D score of 22,577, which itself is much higher than its Passmark DirectX 12 score of 87. This suggests the RTX A6000 is optimized for compute and modern graphics APIs, while its legacy DirectX performance lags, possibly due to driver overhead or architectural priorities. The Quadro M6000, by contrast, has no Passmark data, so its aggregate is purely Geekbench-driven. For users comparing these cards, the head-to-head tests are the more reliable indicator of real-world workstation performance, and there, the RTX A6000 is unambiguously superior.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 has an average benchmark score of 43,313, while the NVIDIA RTX A6000 averages 42,653. The Quadro M6000 is 1.5% ahead in this metric, but this is based on only two Geekbench tests for the M6000 versus nine tests for the RTX A6000, which includes lower-scoring Passmark legacy DirectX tests.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A6000 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX A6000 scores 180,149 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the Quadro M6000’s 39,510. That is a delta of -78.1% from the M6000’s perspective, meaning the RTX A6000 is approximately 4.56x faster in this compute test.

Q: Does the Quadro M6000 win any benchmark against the RTX A6000?

A: In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the Quadro M6000 wins zero tests. The RTX A6000 wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, giving it a 2-0 record in wins.

Q: What is the RTX A6000’s Passmark G3D score, and how does it compare to its Geekbench results?

A: The RTX A6000’s Passmark G3D score is 22,577. This is significantly lower than its Geekbench OpenCL score of 180,149, indicating that the card performs much better in modern compute workloads than in older rasterization tests like DirectX 9 (245) or DirectX 10 (155).

Q: Are both cards in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the Quadro M6000 and the RTX A6000 are at the 84th percentile among all GPUs, meaning they rank in the same broad performance tier despite the large head-to-head differences in specific tests.

Q: What is the RTX A6000’s launch MSRP?

A: The RTX A6000 has a launch MSRP of 4,649 USD. The Quadro M6000 has no recorded launch MSRP in the fact pack.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for any modern workload: the NVIDIA RTX A6000. In both head-to-head benchmarks, it outperforms the Quadro M6000 by margins of 71.5% to 78.1%, which are not incremental improvements but generational leaps. The RTX A6000’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 180,149 versus 39,510 for the M6000 means that for compute-heavy tasks like rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference, the newer card is in a different league. Its Vulkan score of 165,451 versus 47,116 further cements this for graphics workloads that leverage modern APIs.

However, the Quadro M6000 is not without a statistical claim. Its average benchmark score of 43,313 edges out the RTX A6000’s 42,653 by 1.5%, and it sits 1.5% ahead in the nearestRivals comparison. This is almost certainly an artifact of test selection—the M6000’s two Geekbench scores are both high relative to its hardware, while the RTX A6000’s Passmark scores for legacy DirectX (e.g., 87 for DirectX 12, 155 for DirectX 10) drag its average down. If a user’s workflow relies exclusively on Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the M6000’s aggregate could be misleading, but the head-to-head numbers show the RTX A6000 is faster in those exact tests. For a buyer choosing between these two, the RTX A6000 is the rational pick for any current software stack, assuming the 4,649 USD launch MSRP is acceptable. The Quadro M6000, being end-of-life with no successor in the fact pack beyond Quadro Pascal, is only defensible if legacy software compatibility with Maxwell is a hard requirement—and even then, its 12 GB memory and 6.844 TFLOPS FP32 are far below the RTX A6000’s 48 GB and 38.71 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

The specifications diverge sharply across nearly every measurable field. The RTX A6000 uses a GA102 chip on an 8 nm process from Samsung, while the Quadro M6000 uses a GM200 chip on a 28 nm process from TSMC. Transistor counts reflect this: the RTX A6000 packs 28,300 million transistors versus 8,000 million for the M6000, a 3.54x increase. Die size is similar—628 mm² for the RTX A6000 versus 601 mm² for the M6000—but transistor density jumps from 13.3M per mm² to 45.1M per mm². Clock speeds are higher on the RTX A6000: base clock of 1410 MHz versus 988 MHz, and boost clock of 1800 MHz versus 1114 MHz. Memory is a major differentiator: the RTX A6000 has 48 GB of GDDR6 with a 384-bit bus and 768.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the M6000 has 12 GB of GDDR5 with the same 384-bit bus but only 317.4 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clock rates are 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the RTX A6000 versus 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) for the M6000.

Compute resources differ massively. The RTX A6000 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, against the M6000’s 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The RTX A6000 also has 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, which the M6000 lacks entirely. Pixel rate is 201.6 GPixel/s for the RTX A6000 versus 106.9 GPixel/s for the M6000, and texture rate is 604.8 GTexel/s versus 213.9 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 38.71 TFLOPS for the RTX A6000 versus 6.844 TFLOPS for the M6000, and the RTX A6000 also offers FP16 at 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1), while the M6000 has no FP16 data. Power draw is higher on the RTX A6000 at 300 W versus 250 W, with a suggested PSU of 700 W versus 600 W. The RTX A6000 uses an 8-pin EPS power connector, while the M6000 uses a single 8-pin. Bus interface upgrades from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs change from 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 to 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both are dual-slot and have identical lengths (267 mm / 10.5 inches) and heights (111-112 mm / 4.4 inches). The RTX A6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the M6000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1); both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX A6000’s release date is 2020-10-04, versus 2015-03-20 for the M6000.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is foundational. The Quadro M6000 is built on Maxwell 2.0, released as part of the Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) generation, while the RTX A6000 uses Ampere, part of the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. The M6000’s chip is GM200, a 28 nm design from TSMC, whereas the RTX A6000’s chip is GA102, an 8 nm design from Samsung. The transistor count difference—8 billion versus 28.3 billion—is not just a numbers game; it enables the RTX A6000 to include dedicated RT cores (84) and tensor cores (336), which are entirely absent from the M6000. These cores accelerate ray tracing and AI workloads, respectively, and their presence changes what the card can do. The M6000 has no FP16 data, suggesting it lacks the specialized mixed-precision hardware that the RTX A6000 provides at a 1:1 ratio with FP32. The memory architecture also shifts: the M6000 uses GDDR5 with a 6.6 Gbps effective rate, while the RTX A6000 uses GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, doubling the bandwidth per pin despite the same bus width. The RTX A6000’s PCIe 4.0 interface doubles the theoretical bandwidth over the M6000’s PCIe 3.0. The M6000’s predecessor is Quadro Kepler and its successor is Quadro Pascal, placing it in a lineage that ends before Turing and Ampere. The RTX A6000’s predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada, showing a more recent lifecycle. Both cards are end-of-life in production status, but the RTX A6000’s architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate