Radeon HD 6250 IGP vs Quadro K5000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking440not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.64no data
Power efficiency5.82no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGK104Loveland
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date17 August 2012 (12 years ago)9 November 2010 (14 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 cores153680
Core clock speed706 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million450 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)122 Watt9 Watt
Texture fill rate90.373.200
Floating-point processing power2.169 TFLOPS0.064 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs1288

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 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 speed1350 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth172.8 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 Connectors2x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA3.0-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 August 2012 9 November 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 122 Watt 9 Watt

Quadro K5000 has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6250 IGP, on the other hand, has 1255.6% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K5000 and Radeon HD 6250 IGP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K5000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6250 IGP 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 K5000
Quadro K5000
AMD Radeon HD 6250 IGP
Radeon HD 6250 IGP

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.


3.8 96 votes

Rate Quadro K5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6250 IGP 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.