Radeon HD 6750M vs Quadro K5100M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K5100M with Radeon HD 6750M, including specs and performance data.

K5100M
2013
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.34
+242%

K5100M outperforms HD 6750M by a whopping 242% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking506842
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.754.81
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGK104Whistler
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)4 January 2011 (14 years 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 cores1536480
Core clock speed771 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate98.6914.40
Floating-point processing power2.369 TFLOPS0.576 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs12824

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth115.2 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.21.2
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.

K5100M 8.34
+242%
HD 6750M 2.44

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.

K5100M 3205
+242%
HD 6750M 937

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.

K5100M 6880
+494%
HD 6750M 1159

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.

K5100M 24795
+352%
HD 6750M 5483

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:

900p70−75
+233%
21
−233%
Full HD49
+104%
24
−104%
4K29
+263%
8−9
−263%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Elden Ring 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+440%
5−6
−440%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+175%
12−14
−175%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%
Valorant 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+440%
5−6
−440%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Dota 2 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Elden Ring 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+140%
14−16
−140%
Fortnite 45−50
+277%
12−14
−277%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+175%
12−14
−175%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+187%
21−24
−187%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+156%
9−10
−156%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+220%
10−11
−220%
Valorant 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
World of Tanks 120−130
+178%
45−50
−178%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+440%
5−6
−440%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Dota 2 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+140%
14−16
−140%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+175%
12−14
−175%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+187%
21−24
−187%
Valorant 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Elden Ring 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−11 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+141%
16−18
−141%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
World of Tanks 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Valorant 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Elden Ring 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+26.7%
14−16
−26.7%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+26.7%
14−16
−26.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Fortnite 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Valorant 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

This is how K5100M and HD 6750M compete in popular games:

  • K5100M is 233% faster in 900p
  • K5100M is 104% faster in 1080p
  • K5100M is 263% faster in 4K

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K5100M is 1400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, K5100M surpassed HD 6750M in all 52 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.34 2.44
Recency 23 July 2013 4 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 35 Watt

K5100M has a 241.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6750M, on the other hand, has 185.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K5100M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6750M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K5100M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 6750M 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 K5100M
Quadro K5100M
AMD Radeon HD 6750M
Radeon HD 6750M

Other comparisons

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.


3.4 50 votes

Rate Quadro K5100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 53 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6750M 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.