Quadro K5200 vs Radeon R9 280X
Aggregated performance score
Quadro K5200 outperforms Radeon R9 280X by 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 327 | 317 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 11.93 | 5.89 |
Architecture | GCN (2011−2017) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | Thaiti XTL | GK110B |
Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
Design | reference | no data |
Release date | 8 October 2013 (10 years old) | 22 July 2014 (9 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | $1,699.74 |
Current price | $11.99 (0x MSRP) | $451 (0.3x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
R9 280X has 103% better value for money than Quadro K5200.
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 cores | 2048 | 2304 |
Core clock speed | no data | 667 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 771 MHz |
Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 7,080 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 150 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 128.0 | 148.0 |
Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops | 3,553 gflops |
Size and 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).
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 275 mm | 267 mm |
Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 8 GB |
Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | no data | 6008 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 192.3 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | no data |
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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
Eyefinity | + | no data |
HDMI | + | no data |
DisplayPort support | + | no data |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
AppAcceleration | + | no data |
CrossFire | 1 | no data |
Enduro | - | no data |
FreeSync | 1 | no data |
HD3D | + | no data |
LiquidVR | 1 | no data |
PowerTune | - | no data |
TressFX | 1 | no data |
TrueAudio | + | no data |
ZeroCore | - | no data |
UVD | + | no data |
DDMA audio | + | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 12 (11_1) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | + | + |
Mantle | - | no data |
CUDA | no data | 3.5 |
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.
Quadro K5200 outperforms Radeon R9 280X by 3% based on our aggregated 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%
Quadro K5200 outperforms Radeon R9 280X by 3% in Passmark.
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 | 65
+0%
| 65−70
+0%
|
4K | 31
+3.3%
| 30−35
−3.3%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+2%
|
50−55
−2%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
+3.7%
|
27−30
−3.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+2%
|
50−55
−2%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Metro Exodus | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 48
+6.7%
|
45−50
−6.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
+3.7%
|
27−30
−3.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+2%
|
50−55
−2%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+2.5%
|
40−45
−2.5%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
+3.7%
|
27−30
−3.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
Hitman 3 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 27−30
+3.7%
|
27−30
−3.7%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
This is how R9 280X and Quadro K5200 compete in popular games:
- Quadro K5200 is 0% faster than R9 280X in 1080p
- R9 280X is 3.3% faster than Quadro K5200 in 4K
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 15.07 | 15.57 |
Recency | 8 October 2013 | 22 July 2014 |
Cost | $299 | $1699.74 |
Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 8 GB |
Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 150 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 280X and Quadro K5200.
Be aware that Radeon R9 280X is a desktop card while Quadro K5200 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.