NVIDIA NVS 5200M vs AMD FirePro M5950

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

FirePro M5950
3.39
+155%

FirePro M5950 outperforms NVS 5200M by 155% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking689977
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.280.09
ArchitectureTerascale 2 (2009−2015)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameWhistler-XTN13M-NS
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date13 April 2011 (12 years old)1 June 2012 (11 years old)
Current price$386 $139
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FirePro M5950 has 211% better value for money than NVS 5200M.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores48096
Core clock speed725 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors716 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate17.4010.00
Floating-point performance696.0 gflops258.0 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on FirePro M5950 and NVS 5200M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportn/ano data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM
Form factorMXM-Ano data

Memory

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth57 GB/s14.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimusno data+

API support

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDAno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro M5950 3.39
+155%
NVS 5200M 1.33

FirePro M5950 outperforms NVS 5200M by 155% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FirePro M5950 1314
+155%
NVS 5200M 516

FirePro M5950 outperforms NVS 5200M by 155% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FirePro M5950 6257
+46.6%
NVS 5200M 4268

FirePro M5950 outperforms NVS 5200M by 47% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FirePro M5950 1350
+33.9%
NVS 5200M 1008

FirePro M5950 outperforms NVS 5200M by 34% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

FirePro M5950 1505
NVS 5200M 2216
+47.2%

NVS 5200M outperforms FirePro M5950 by 47% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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:

900p24
+167%
9−10
−167%
Full HD26
+136%
11
−136%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1

This is how FirePro M5950 and NVS 5200M compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • FirePro M5950 is 167% faster than NVS 5200M

1080p resolution:

  • FirePro M5950 is 136% faster than NVS 5200M

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FirePro M5950 is 900% faster than the NVS 5200M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FirePro M5950 is ahead in 31 test (97%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 3.39 1.33
Recency 13 April 2011 1 June 2012
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 25 Watt

The FirePro M5950 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 5200M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro M5950
FirePro M5950
NVIDIA NVS 5200M
NVS 5200M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 50 votes

Rate AMD FirePro M5950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 108 votes

Rate NVIDIA NVS 5200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.