Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 256MB VRAM Quadro NVS 160M and 24GB VRAM Quadro RTX 6000 Passive to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro NVS 160M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (12W vs 260W)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 10 years late
Boost Clock1560MHz
More VRAM (24GB vs 256GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 11.20GB/s)
4600 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro NVS 160M
0.023 TFLOPS
Quadro RTX 6000 Passive +62421%
14.38 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Aug 2008
Release Date
Aug 2018
NVS Mobile
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
MXM-I
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
Base Clock
1305 MHz
-
Boost Clock
1560 MHz
700 MHz
Memory Clock
1750 MHz

Memory

256MB
Memory Size
24GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR6
64bit
Memory Bus
384bit
11.20GB/s
Bandwidth
672.0GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
1
SM Count
72
8
Shading Units
4608
4
TMUs
288
4
ROPs
96
-
Tensor Cores
576
-
RT Cores
72
-
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
16 KB
L2 Cache
6 MB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

2.320 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
149.8 GPixel/s
2.320 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
449.3 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
28.75 TFLOPS
23.20 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
14.38 TFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
449.3 GFLOPS

Board Design

12W
TDP
260W
-
Suggested PSU
600 W
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
-
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

Graphics Processor

G98
GPU Name
TU102
NB9M-GS
GPU Variant
TU102-875-A1
Tesla
Architecture
Turing
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
65 nm
Process Size
12 nm
0.21 billion
Transistors
18.6 billion
86 mm²
Die Size
754 mm²

Graphics Features

11.1 (10_0)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
1.1
CUDA
7.5
4.0
Shader Model
6.6

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy