Radeon RX 7900 XT vs Quadro K500M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K500M with Radeon RX 7900 XT, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K500M
2012
1 GB DDR3, 35 Watt
1.25

RX 7900 XT outperforms K500M by a whopping 5915% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking103914
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data37.76
Power efficiency2.4517.17
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 31
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)3 November 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$899

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 cores1925376
Core clock speed850 MHz1387 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2394 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate13.60804.4
Floating-point processing power0.3264 TFLOPS51.48 TFLOPS
ROPs8192
TMUs16336
Ray Tracing Coresno data84

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data276 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB20 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit320 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s800.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan+1.3
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.

Quadro K500M 1.25
RX 7900 XT 75.19
+5915%

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 K500M 480
RX 7900 XT 28968
+5935%

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 HD3−4
−6733%
205
+6733%
1440p2−3
−6550%
133
+6550%
4K1−2
−8500%
86
+8500%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.39
1440pno data6.76
4Kno data10.45

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−7800%
237
+7800%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−2450%
150−160
+2450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−2900%
120−130
+2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6967%
212
+6967%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−11700%
110−120
+11700%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−6067%
180−190
+6067%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−12100%
240−250
+12100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−2050%
120−130
+2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−1814%
260−270
+1814%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−6050%
120−130
+6050%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−3900%
300−350
+3900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−364%
150−160
+364%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−2450%
150−160
+2450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−2900%
120−130
+2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6233%
190
+6233%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−11700%
110−120
+11700%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−6067%
180−190
+6067%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−12100%
240−250
+12100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−2050%
120−130
+2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−1814%
260−270
+1814%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−6050%
120−130
+6050%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−6050%
492
+6050%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−1373%
160−170
+1373%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−364%
150−160
+364%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−2450%
150−160
+2450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−2900%
120−130
+2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−5867%
179
+5867%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−11700%
110−120
+11700%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−12100%
240−250
+12100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−2050%
120−130
+2050%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−2400%
350
+2400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−5200%
424
+5200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−2309%
265
+2309%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−364%
150−160
+364%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−6050%
120−130
+6050%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−16500%
160−170
+16500%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5500%
110−120
+5500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−8800%
85−90
+8800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−12100%
122
+12100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−8300%
80−85
+8300%
Hitman 3 7−8
−1457%
100−110
+1457%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−6825%
277
+6825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 130−140
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−3900%
240−250
+3900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−2900%
120−130
+2900%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 65−70

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−6200%
60−65
+6200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−6000%
60−65
+6000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 50−55
Far Cry 5 0−1 50−55

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2700%
80−85
+2700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Metro Exodus 141
+0%
141
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 325
+0%
325
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Hitman 3 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 159
+0%
159
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 60
+0%
60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 173
+0%
173
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how Quadro K500M and RX 7900 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7900 XT is 6733% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7900 XT is 6550% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7900 XT is 8500% faster in 4K

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7900 XT is 16500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 7900 XT is ahead in 47 tests (70%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (30%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.25 75.19
Recency 1 June 2012 3 November 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 20 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 300 Watt

Quadro K500M has 757.1% lower power consumption.

RX 7900 XT, on the other hand, has a 5915.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K500M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K500M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 7900 XT 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 K500M
Quadro K500M
AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT
Radeon RX 7900 XT

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro K500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1794 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7900 XT 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.