AMD FirePro S9050 vs NVIDIA Quadro K6000

Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro S9050 and NVIDIA Quadro K6000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro S9050

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
• Around 13% higher core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 797 MHz
• Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 68.324 vs 67.178
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 91.133 vs 88.889
• Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6260 vs 3711
• 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 13032 vs 3356
• Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6260 vs 3711
• 3.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 13032 vs 3356

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K6000

• 2.1x more texture fill rate: 216.5 GTexel / s vs 100.8 GTexel / s
• Around 61% higher pipelines: 2880 vs 1792
• Around 61% better floating-point performance: 5,196 gflops vs 3,226 gflops
• Around 9% higher memory clock speed: 6008 MHz vs 5500 MHz
• Around 65% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8068 vs 4901
• Around 46% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 539 vs 369
• Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1816.61 vs 1463.376
• Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 7.435 vs 6.491
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 355.166 vs 344.551
• Around 79% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12657 vs 7062
• Around 79% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12657 vs 7062

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD FirePro S9050
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K6000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	4901 8068
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	369 539
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	68.324 67.178
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1463.376 1816.61
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6.491 7.435
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	91.133 88.889
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	344.551 355.166
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7062 12657
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6260 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13032 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7062 12657
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6260 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13032 3356

Compare specifications (specs)