Quadro RTX 6000 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti — Specs & Performance Compared

Verdict: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti is ahead of the Quadro RTX 6000 on all 3 shared benchmarks on file, by 3% to 20%, including 3% in 3DMark Time Spy (14,121 vs 13,758). On llama2:7b, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti generates 107.5 tokens/s (per KnightLi CUDA Leaderboard) against 102.8 for the Quadro RTX 6000 (per llama.cpp GitHub (CUDA performance scoreboard, Discussion #15013)), best community run on file for each.

Side-by-side GPU comparison of the Quadro RTX 6000 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti. Both released in 2018. Specs, synthetic benchmarks, AI inference tok/s, and Amazon availability below; each column header links to that part's benchmark page.

NVIDIA · Turing

Quadro RTX 6000

24 GB VRAM2018

Full Quadro RTX 6000 benchmarks →

NVIDIA · Turing

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti

11 GB VRAM250W TDP$999 MSRP2018

Full NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti benchmarks →

*Price sourced from Amazon.com. Price and availability subject to change.

Where to buy

A listing for each part; the current price and stock are on the retailer's page.

Specs side-by-side

Spec	Quadro RTX 6000	NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
vram gb	24	11
tdp w	—	250
cuda cores	—	4352
rt cores	—	68
tensor cores	—	544
process nm	—	12

Synthetic benchmarks

Each row says whether a higher or a lower number is better (ranks and times are lower-is-better). Scores come from PCTestBench, 3DMark, HWBOT, UL Benchmarks, TopCPU, CpuTronic GPU Rankings and PassMark; each row links its sources, and where they differ the cell shows their median. Empty cells mean we don't yet have that benchmark on file for the SKU.

Benchmark	Quadro RTX 6000	NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
3DMark Fire Strike Ultra (higher is better) Source: PCTestBench, 3DMark	8,190 points	8,528 points
3DMark Fire Strike Ultra Graphics (higher is better) Source: 3DMark	8,245 points	—
3DMark Port Royal (higher is better) Source: HWBOT, PCTestBench, 3DMark	—	9,471 points
3DMark Speed Way (higher is better) Source: 3DMark	—	2,915 points
3DMark Steel Nomad (higher is better) Source: UL Benchmarks	—	3,502 points
3DMark Time Spy (higher is better) Source: 3DMark, PCTestBench, TopCPU, CpuTronic GPU Rankings	13,758 points	14,121 points
3DMark Time Spy Extreme (higher is better) Source: PCTestBench	—	6,452 points
PassMark G2D Mark (higher is better) Source: PassMark	754 pts	—
PassMark G3D Mark (higher is better) Source: PassMark	17,828 pts	21,413 points
PassMark GPU Compute (higher is better) Source: PassMark	9,044 Ops/Sec	—

AI inference (tokens/sec)

Top community-reported tokens-per-second results for popular LLMs whose weights fit the card's memory, each linked to its source. See the per-SKU benchmark page for the full set including quantization and prompt length.

Quadro RTX 6000

llama3.2:1b-instruct: 253.0 tok/s (LocalScore (Mozilla llamafile benchmark))
llama2:7b: 102.8 tok/s (llama.cpp GitHub (CUDA performance scoreboard, Discussion #15013))
llama-2-7b: 102.8 tok/s (llama.cpp GitHub)

All Quadro RTX 6000 AI benchmarks →

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti

llama3.2:3b: 950.0 tok/s (GigaChad LLC)
llama3.2:1b: 222.0 tok/s (LocalScore.ai)
llama3.2:3b: 180.4 tok/s (geerlingguy/ai-benchmarks)

All NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti AI benchmarks →

Quick answers

Which is faster, the Quadro RTX 6000 or the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti?

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti is ahead of the Quadro RTX 6000 on all 3 shared benchmarks on file, by 3% to 20%, including 3% in 3DMark Time Spy (14,121 vs 13,758).

Which is better for running local LLMs?

On llama2:7b, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti generates 107.5 tokens/s (per KnightLi CUDA Leaderboard) against 102.8 for the Quadro RTX 6000 (per llama.cpp GitHub (CUDA performance scoreboard, Discussion #15013)), best community run on file for each.