Radeon 780M vs Quadro 5010M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 5010M with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 5010M
2011
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
4.59

780M outperforms 5010M by a whopping 299% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking651298
Place by popularitynot in top-10047
Power efficiency3.2085.08
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGF110Hawx Point
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)6 December 2023 (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 cores384768
Core clock speed450 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2700 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate21.60129.6
Floating-point processing power0.6912 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs4848
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed650 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.0-

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.

Quadro 5010M 4.59
Radeon 780M 18.31
+299%

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.

Quadro 5010M 1771
Radeon 780M 7064
+299%

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.

Quadro 5010M 2693
Radeon 780M 12785
+375%

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.

Quadro 5010M 12991
Radeon 780M 41622
+220%

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:

900p38
−295%
150−160
+295%
Full HD59
+63.9%
36
−63.9%
1440p5−6
−300%
20
+300%
4K3−4
−400%
15
+400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−388%
39
+388%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Battlefield 5 10−12
−445%
60−65
+445%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−288%
31
+288%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−330%
40−45
+330%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−311%
110−120
+311%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−530%
60−65
+530%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−308%
45−50
+308%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−253%
60−65
+253%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−93.3%
85−90
+93.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Battlefield 5 10−12
−445%
60−65
+445%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24
+200%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−330%
40−45
+330%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−277%
45−50
+277%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−311%
110−120
+311%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
−200%
90−95
+200%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−530%
60−65
+530%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−308%
45−50
+308%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−218%
54
+218%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−147%
40−45
+147%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−93.3%
85−90
+93.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−215%
40−45
+215%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−650%
30−33
+650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−188%
23
+188%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−330%
40−45
+330%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−311%
110−120
+311%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
−76.7%
53
+76.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−171%
46
+171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−70.6%
29
+70.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+150%
18
−150%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−308%
45−50
+308%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−300%
27−30
+300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1150%
100−105
+1150%
Hitman 3 9−10
−144%
21−24
+144%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−270%
35−40
+270%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−400%
20
+400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Hitman 3 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−2250%
90−95
+2250%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−1800%
18−20
+1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 15

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 3−4
Far Cry 5 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−733%
24−27
+733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 32
+0%
32
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+0%
17
+0%

This is how Quadro 5010M and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 780M is 295% faster in 900p
  • Quadro 5010M is 64% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 780M is 300% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 780M is 400% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro 5010M is 150% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 780M is 3300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro 5010M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Radeon 780M is ahead in 66 tests (94%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.59 18.31
Recency 22 February 2011 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 298.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 900% more advanced lithography process, and 566.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 5010M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 5010M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 780M 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.

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 5010M
Quadro 5010M
AMD Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M

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.


3.3 7 votes

Rate Quadro 5010M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1477 votes

Rate Radeon 780M 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.