Quadro P500 vs ATI FirePro M5800
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro M5800 and Quadro P500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
P500 outperforms ATI M5800 by a whopping 195% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1001 | 684 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.81 | 16.25 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Madison | GP108 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 1 March 2010 (14 years ago) | 5 January 2018 (7 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 400 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 1455 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1518 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 627 million | 1,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 18 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 13.00 | 24.29 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.52 TFLOPS | 0.7772 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 |
| TMUs | 20 | 16 |
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 | medium sized | large |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1253 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 40.1 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 6.1 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 21
+10.5%
| 19
−10.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Elden Ring | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−500%
|
12−14
+500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−100%
|
18−20
+100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−500%
|
12−14
+500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Dota 2 | 2−3
−700%
|
16
+700%
|
| Elden Ring | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−100%
|
21−24
+100%
|
| Fortnite | 6−7
−317%
|
24−27
+317%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−100%
|
18−20
+100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 9−10 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−147%
|
35−40
+147%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| World of Tanks | 30−33
−137%
|
70−75
+137%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−500%
|
12−14
+500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
| Dota 2 | 2−3
−2150%
|
45
+2150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−100%
|
21−24
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−100%
|
18−20
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−147%
|
35−40
+147%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Elden Ring | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−222%
|
27−30
+222%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| World of Tanks | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Elden Ring | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Valorant | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Valorant | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Valorant | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how ATI M5800 and Quadro P500 compete in popular games:
- ATI M5800 is 11% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P500 is 2150% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro P500 is ahead in 40 tests (74%)
- there's a draw in 14 tests (26%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.44 | 4.25 |
| Recency | 1 March 2010 | 5 January 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 18 Watt |
Quadro P500 has a 195.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 44.4% lower power consumption.
The Quadro P500 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M5800 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
