Radeon R5 240 OEM vs Quadro 5000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking630not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.15no data
Power efficiency2.26no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGF100Oland
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 February 2011 (13 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 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 cores352384
Core clock speed513 MHz730 MHz
Boost clock speedno data780 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)152 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate22.5718.72
Floating-point processing power0.7223 TFLOPS0.599 TFLOPS
ROPs408
TMUs4424

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length248 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2.5 GB2 GB
Memory bus width320 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth120.0 GB/s14.4 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 February 2011 1 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2.5 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 152 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro 5000 has a 25% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R5 240 OEM, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 204% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro 5000 and Radeon R5 240 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro 5000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R5 240 OEM is a desktop one.


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

Vote for your favorite

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


NVIDIA Quadro 5000
Quadro 5000
AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
Radeon R5 240 OEM

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


4.5 32 votes

Rate Quadro 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 546 votes

Rate Radeon R5 240 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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