NVIDIA
NVIDIA Quadro P5000 vs Intel Arc Pro B60
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
Intel
Arc Pro B60
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro P5000 and Arc Pro B60 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Quadro P5000 outperforms Arc Pro B60 by ~15% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+15%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Partially verifiedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 0Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (~15%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Quadro P5000
- Higher catalog performance index
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: CUDA / OpenCL · No dedicated hardware upscaling (DLSS unsupported)
Reasons to consider Arc Pro B60
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0 / oneAPI · Intel XeSS
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
IntelPerformance
Efficiency
Memory capacity
5852
10087
88100
Graphics card ranking
Positions 24–29of 30
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
NVIDIA Quadro P5000
78 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
58Better
52
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
48Better
44
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
46Better
41
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
87
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
62Better
54
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
Interface
Memory busBetter
Memory type
Architecture
Device class
Process nodeBetter
Release date
VRAMBetter
Power consumptionBetter
HDMI
Vulkan
Compute API
TFLOPSBetter
DirectX
OpenGL
Upscaling
Transistor count
Die size
Shader units / coresBetter
Base clock
Boost clock
Length
Thickness
Recommended PSU
Power connector
USB Type-C
Max monitors
Max resolution
Memory bandwidth—
Memory frequency—
Clock speed—
Memory cache—
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100585211%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10062603%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10066652%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1008810013%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001008714%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10072743%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10070711%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10066652%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10075784%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10067662%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12 (feature level 12_1)DirectX 12 Ultimate
VulkanVulkan 1.31.3
OpenGL4.6Up to 4.6
UpscalingNo dedicated hardware upscaling (DLSS unsupported)Intel XeSS
Compute APICUDA / OpenCLOpenCL 3.0 / oneAPI
Architecture and release
ArchitecturePascalXe2
Process node16 nmTSMC N5Better
Release date2016Q2'25
Device classProfProf
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count7.2 billionNot publicly specified
Die size314 mm²Not publicly specified
Shader units / cores2560 CUDA coresBetter20 Xe cores
Base clock1607 MHzNot publicly specified
Boost clock1733 MHzNot publicly specified
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCI Express 5.0 x8
Length267 mmVaries by board manufacturer
ThicknessDual-slot (38 mm)Varies by board manufacturer
Recommended PSU450 WNot publicly specified
Power connector1× 8-pin PCIeVaries by board manufacturer
Display outputs and limits
HDMI0 native (DisplayPort adapter supported)HDMI 2.1; board dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4DisplayPort 2.1; board dependent
USB Type-CNot supportedVaries by board manufacturer
Max monitors4 simultaneous displays4
Max resolution7680×4320 at 30 Hz via DisplayPort 1.47680 x 4320@120Hz
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM16 GB24 GB GDDR6Better
Memory typeGDDR5XGDDR6
Memory bus256-bitBetter192 bit
TFLOPS8.912.28Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 0
- Specifications
- 23 / 62
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (2)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
No recorded changes yet. Change tracking starts with the evidence system; earlier history has not been reconstructed.
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Quadro P5000 or Arc Pro B60?+
Quadro P5000 has the higher overall gaming score, while Quadro P5000 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Quadro P5000 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
Quadro P5000 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Quadro P5000 offers more overall performance, while Quadro P5000 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Quadro P5000 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
Quadro P5000 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Quadro P5000 leads in combined 1440p performance. Quadro P5000 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Quadro P5000 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Quadro P5000 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
Quadro P5000 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to Quadro P5000 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.