GeForce 8800 GT vs Quadro K5000M

Place in the ranking	547	1059
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.49	0.03
Power efficiency	5.04	0.67
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GK104	G92
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	7 August 2012 (12 years ago)	29 October 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$329.99	$349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

K5000M has 8200% better value for money than 8800 GT.

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	1344	112
Core clock speed	601 MHz	600 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	105 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	67.31	33.60
Floating-point processing power	1.615 TFLOPS	0.336 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	112	56

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	large	no data
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Height	no data	Single Slot
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin
SLI options	-	2-way

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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	750 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	57.6 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	No outputs	Dual Link DVIHDTV
Multi monitor support	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)	no data	128bit
Optimus	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
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.

K5000M 7.05
+497%

8800 GT 1.18

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.

K5000M 2806
+500%

8800 GT 468

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

54
+500%

9−10

−500%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

6.11
+535%

38.78

−535%

K5000M has 535% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +500%	5−6 −500%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Valorant	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Dota 2	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Fortnite	40−45 +514%	7−8 −514%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +500%	5−6 −500%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +525%	4−5 −525%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +556%	9−10 −556%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%
Valorant	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
World of Tanks	110−120 +522%	18−20 −522%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +667%	3−4 −667%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Dota 2	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +540%	5−6 −540%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +500%	5−6 −500%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +556%	9−10 −556%
Valorant	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Dota 2	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Grand Theft Auto V	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +550%	6−7 −550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
World of Tanks	50−55 +563%	8−9 −563%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Forza Horizon 5	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Valorant	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Fortnite	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6	0−1
Valorant	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%

This is how K5000M and 8800 GT compete in popular games:

K5000M is 500% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.05	1.18
Recency	7 August 2012	29 October 2007
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	105 Watt

K5000M has a 497.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K5000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K5000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 8800 GT is a desktop one.

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