Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 24GB VRAM Quadro RTX 6000 Passive and 1024MB VRAM Quadro 2000 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 7 years and 8 months late
Boost Clock1560MHz
More VRAM (24GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 41.60GB/s)
4416 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro 2000 's Advantages
Lower TDP (62W vs 260W)

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro RTX 6000 Passive +2895%
14.38 TFLOPS
Quadro 2000
0.48 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Aug 2018
Release Date
Dec 2010
Quadro
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16

Clock Speeds

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

Memory

24GB
Memory Size
1024MB
GDDR6
Memory Type
GDDR5
384bit
Memory Bus
128bit
672.0GB/s
Bandwidth
41.60GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
72
SM Count
4
4608
Shading Units
192
288
TMUs
32
96
ROPs
16
576
Tensor Cores
-
72
RT Cores
-
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
6 MB
L2 Cache
256 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

149.8 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
5.000 GPixel/s
449.3 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
20.00 GTexel/s
28.75 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
14.38 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
480.0 GFLOPS
449.3 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
40.00 GFLOPS

Board Design

260W
TDP
62W
600 W
Suggested PSU
250 W
No outputs
Outputs
1x DVI 2x DisplayPort
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
None

Graphics Processor

TU102
GPU Name
GF106
TU102-875-A1
GPU Variant
GF106-875-KA-A1
Turing
Architecture
Fermi
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
12 nm
Process Size
40 nm
18.6 billion
Transistors
1.17 billion
754 mm²
Die Size
238 mm²

Graphics Features

12 Ultimate (12_2)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.3
Vulkan
N/A
7.5
CUDA
2.1
6.6
Shader Model
5.1

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy