M1000M vs K5100M

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

K5100M
7.94
+7%

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 7% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking481496
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money1.500.81
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameN15E-Q5-A2GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date23 July 2013 (10 years old)2 October 2015 (8 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$200.89
Current price$440 $706 (3.5x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K5100M has 85% better value for money than M1000M.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1536512
Core clock speed771 MHz993 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1072 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate98.6931.78
Floating-point performance2,369 gflops1,017 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro K5100M and Quadro M1000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

Memory

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB/4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed3600 MHz5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth115.2 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.21.2

Technologies

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

Optimus++
3D Vision Pro++
Mosaic++
nView Display Management++
Optimus++

API support

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model55.0
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA+5.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

K5100M 7.94
+7%
M1000M 7.42

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 7% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

K5100M 3077
+7%
M1000M 2877

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 7% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

K5100M 6880
+62.7%
M1000M 4230

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 63% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

K5100M 4793
+37%
M1000M 3498

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 37% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

K5100M 31015
+32.4%
M1000M 23422

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 32% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

K5100M 11544
+36.9%
M1000M 8434

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 37% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

K5100M 33
+37.5%
M1000M 24

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 38% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 44
+45.1%
M1000M 31

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 45% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 61
+2.5%
M1000M 59

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 3% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 71
+129%
M1000M 31

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 129% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 59
+57.2%
M1000M 37

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 57% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 43
+27.1%
M1000M 34

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 27% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 18
+50%
M1000M 12

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 50% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 27
+34.3%
M1000M 20

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 34% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

K5100M 2
+29.4%
M1000M 2

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 29% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 27
+34.3%
M1000M 20

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 34% in SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase.

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 44
+45.1%
M1000M 31

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 45% in SPECviewperf 12 - Maya.

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 59
+57.2%
M1000M 37

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 57% in SPECviewperf 12 - Catia.

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 61
+2.7%
M1000M 59

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 3% in SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks.

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 71
+129%
M1000M 31

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 129% in SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX.

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 43
+27.1%
M1000M 34

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 27% in SPECviewperf 12 - Creo.

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 18
+50%
M1000M 12

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 50% in SPECviewperf 12 - Medical.

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

Benchmark coverage: 2%

K5100M 2.2
+29.4%
M1000M 1.7

K5100M outperforms M1000M by 29% in SPECviewperf 12 - Energy.

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 HD51
+30.8%
39
−30.8%
4K30
+131%
13
−131%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+7.7%
24−27
−7.7%
Hitman 3 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+7.7%
24−27
−7.7%
Hitman 3 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+31.6%
19
−31.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+7.7%
24−27
−7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+27.3%
11
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Hitman 3 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+42.9%
7
−42.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how K5100M and M1000M compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • K5100M is 30.8% faster than M1000M

4K resolution:

  • K5100M is 131% faster than M1000M

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the K5100M is 100% faster than the M1000M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K5100M is ahead in 53 tests (78%)
  • there's a draw in 15 tests (22%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 7.94 7.42
Recency 23 July 2013 2 October 2015
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB/4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 40 Watt

We couldn't decide between Quadro K5100M and Quadro M1000M. The differences in performance seem too small.


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

User ratings

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


NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
Quadro K5100M
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
Quadro M1000M

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.5 44 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro K5100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 430 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro M1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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