Quadro K1000M vs HD Graphics 5600

Place in the ranking	600	894
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.52
Power efficiency	27.08	3.10
Architecture	Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Broadwell GT2	GK107
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	5 September 2014 (10 years ago)	1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$119.90

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	192	192
Core clock speed	300 MHz	850 MHz
Boost clock speed	1050 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,300 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.20	13.60
Floating-point processing power	0.4032 TFLOPS	0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs	3	16
TMUs	24	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	no data	medium sized
Interface	Ring Bus	MXM-A (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	System Shared	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	2 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	28.8 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

Portable Device Dependent

No outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	-	+
Quick Sync	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	+	+
CUDA	-	+

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.

HD Graphics 5600 5.89
+192%

K1000M 2.02

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.

HD Graphics 5600 2263
+192%

K1000M 775

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.

HD Graphics 5600 1431
+29.9%

K1000M 1102

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:

900p	24−27 +167%	9 −167%
Full HD	11 −45.5%	16 +45.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

7.49

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +118%	10−12 −118%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
Valorant	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Dota 2	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +115%	12−14 −115%
Fortnite	35−40 +250%	10−11 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +118%	10−12 −118%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14 −42.9%	20−22 +42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −50%	9−10 +50%
Valorant	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%
World of Tanks	90−95 +141%	35−40 −141%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Dota 2	20−22 +400%	4−5 −400%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +115%	12−14 −115%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +118%	10−12 −118%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 +145%	20−22 −145%
Valorant	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +177%	12−14 −177%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
World of Tanks	40−45 +223%	12−14 −223%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Valorant	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Fortnite	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Forza Horizon 5	3−4	0−1
Valorant	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

This is how HD Graphics 5600 and K1000M compete in popular games:

HD Graphics 5600 is 167% faster in 900p
K1000M is 45% faster in 1080p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 5600 is 650% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the K1000M is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD Graphics 5600 is ahead in 43 tests (91%)
K1000M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.89	2.02
Recency	5 September 2014	1 June 2012
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	45 Watt

HD Graphics 5600 has a 191.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 5600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 5600 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K1000M is a mobile workstation one.

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