GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition vs Quadro 5000M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro 5000M with GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.
5000M outperforms 775M Mac Edition by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 694 | 827 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.82 | 2.34 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | GK104 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 27 July 2010 (16 years ago) | 8 November 2013 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 320 | 1344 |
| Core clock speed | 405 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 3,540 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 16.20 | 89.26 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.5184 TFLOPS | 2.142 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 40 | 112 |
| L1 Cache | 640 KB | 112 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | 3.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+83.3%
|
12−14
−83.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+75%
|
12−14
−75%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+83.3%
|
12−14
−83.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| Fortnite | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+90%
|
10−11
−90%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+74.3%
|
35−40
−74.3%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+75%
|
12−14
−75%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+83.3%
|
12−14
−83.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
+70%
|
50−55
−70%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+75%
|
24−27
−75%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| Fortnite | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+77.8%
|
9−10
−77.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+90%
|
10−11
−90%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+74.3%
|
35−40
−74.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+75%
|
12−14
−75%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
+75%
|
24−27
−75%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+90%
|
10−11
−90%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+74.3%
|
35−40
−74.3%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 30−33
+66.7%
|
18−20
−66.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+81%
|
21−24
−81%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+71.4%
|
21−24
−71.4%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+66.7%
|
30−33
−66.7%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+77.8%
|
9−10
−77.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 21−24
+75%
|
12−14
−75%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+70%
|
10−11
−70%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.94 | 3.02 |
| Recency | 27 July 2010 | 8 November 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
Quadro 5000M has a 64% higher aggregate performance score.
GTX 775M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 14% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro 5000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro 5000M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
