RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell vs GeForce G210M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce G210M with RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, including specs and performance data.
RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell outperforms G210M by a whopping 34383% 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 | 1372 | 1 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.67 | 26.91 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) |
| GPU code name | GT218 | GB202 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 15 June 2009 (16 years ago) | 18 March 2025 (less than a year 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 | 16 | 14080 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | 1740 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2377 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 260 million | 92,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 5.000 | 1,045.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.048 TFLOPS | 66.94 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 72 | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 176 |
| TMUs | 8 | 440 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 440 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 110 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 13.8 MB |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | 96 MB |
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 | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-pin |
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | Up to 1 GB | 48 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 500 (DDR2), Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | 1.34 TB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | Dual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIVGA | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | + | 12.0 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 16
−34275%
| 5500−5550
+34275%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−29900%
|
300−310
+29900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−33900%
|
1700−1750
+33900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−29900%
|
300−310
+29900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−33650%
|
1350−1400
+33650%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−33900%
|
1700−1750
+33900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−34186%
|
2400−2450
+34186%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−34323%
|
8950−9000
+34323%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14
−34186%
|
4800−4850
+34186%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−29900%
|
300−310
+29900%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−34344%
|
3100−3150
+34344%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−33650%
|
1350−1400
+33650%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−33900%
|
1700−1750
+33900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−34186%
|
2400−2450
+34186%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−33900%
|
1700−1750
+33900%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−34323%
|
8950−9000
+34323%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−29900%
|
300−310
+29900%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−34344%
|
3100−3150
+34344%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−33650%
|
1350−1400
+33650%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
−33900%
|
1700−1750
+33900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−34186%
|
2400−2450
+34186%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−33900%
|
1700−1750
+33900%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−34323%
|
8950−9000
+34323%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−32400%
|
650−700
+32400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−33233%
|
1000−1050
+33233%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−29900%
|
300−310
+29900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−34233%
|
5150−5200
+34233%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−32400%
|
650−700
+32400%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−29900%
|
300−310
+29900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−32400%
|
650−700
+32400%
|
This is how GeForce G210M and RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell compete in popular games:
- RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is 34275% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.29 | 100.00 |
| Recency | 15 June 2009 | 18 March 2025 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 300 Watt |
GeForce G210M has 2042.9% lower power consumption.
RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, on the other hand, has a 34382.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G210M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce G210M is a notebook graphics card while RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
