Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro K200M

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro K200M

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 24GB VRAM Quadro RTX 6000 Passive and 1024MB VRAM Quadro K200M 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 4 years late
Boost Clock1560MHz
More VRAM (24GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 12.80GB/s)
4416 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro K200M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (35W vs 260W)

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro RTX 6000 Passive +4311%
14.38 TFLOPS
Quadro K200M
0.326 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Aug 2018
Release Date
Aug 2014
Quadro
Generation
Quadro Mobile
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
MXM-A (3.0)

Clock Speeds

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

Memory

24GB
Memory Size
1024MB
GDDR6
Memory Type
DDR3
384bit
Memory Bus
64bit
672.0GB/s
Bandwidth
12.80GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
72
SM Count
-
4608
Shading Units
192
288
TMUs
16
96
ROPs
8
576
Tensor Cores
-
72
RT Cores
-
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
16 KB (per SMX)
6 MB
L2 Cache
128 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

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

Board Design

260W
TDP
35W
600 W
Suggested PSU
-
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
-

Graphics Processor

TU102
GPU Name
GK107
TU102-875-A1
GPU Variant
N14M-Q1
Turing
Architecture
Kepler
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
12 nm
Process Size
28 nm
18.6 billion
Transistors
1.27 billion
754 mm²
Die Size
118 mm²

Graphics Features

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

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy