Quadro P620 vs FirePro W5000

Place in the ranking	525	468
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.54	no data
Power efficiency	7.13	16.35
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Pitcairn	GP107
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	7 August 2012 (12 years ago)	1 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$599	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	768	512
Core clock speed	825 MHz	1177 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1443 MHz
Number of transistors	2,800 million	3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	39.60	46.18
Floating-point processing power	1.267 TFLOPS	1.478 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	48	32

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).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	183 mm	145 mm
Width	1-slot	IGP
Form factor	full height / half length	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	2 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	102.4 GB/s	96.13 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	1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort	No outputs
DisplayPort count	2	no data
Dual-link DVI support	+	-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	-	6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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 W5000 7.77

Quadro P620 9.50
+22.3%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

FirePro W5000 2988

Quadro P620 3652
+22.2%

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.

FirePro W5000 9969

Quadro P620 12086
+21.2%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

FirePro W5000 12432
+13.9%

Quadro P620 10916

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

35−40

−37.1%

48
+37.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

17.11

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Dota 2	30 +0%	30 +0%
Elden Ring	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Far Cry 5	64 +0%	64 +0%
Fortnite	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	6 +0%	6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	125 +0%	125 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
World of Tanks	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Dota 2	83 +0%	83 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Elden Ring	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
World of Tanks	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Elden Ring	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

This is how FirePro W5000 and Quadro P620 compete in popular games:

Quadro P620 is 37% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.77	9.50
Recency	7 August 2012	1 February 2018
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	40 Watt

Quadro P620 has a 22.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 87.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P620 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5000 in performance tests.

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