HD Graphics 5500 vs Quadro M2000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

M2000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
8.95
+497%

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by a whopping 497% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking454933
Place by popularitynot in top-10078
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.510.06
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Gen. 8 Broadwell (2014−2015)
GPU code nameGM107Broadwell GT2
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date2 October 2015 (8 years ago)5 January 2015 (9 years ago)
Current price$363 $410

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

M2000M has 4083% better value for money than HD Graphics 5500.

Detailed specifications

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 cores64024
Core clock speed1038 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1197 MHz950 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate43.9222.80
Floating-point performance1,405 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M2000M and HD Graphics 5500 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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x1
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno data
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+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.1.80
CUDA5.0no data

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.

M2000M 8.95
+497%
HD Graphics 5500 1.50

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 497% based on our aggregate 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%

M2000M 3455
+495%
HD Graphics 5500 581

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 495% 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%

M2000M 5143
+425%
HD Graphics 5500 979

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 425% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

M2000M 20567
+329%
HD Graphics 5500 4798

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 329% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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%

M2000M 4157
+527%
HD Graphics 5500 663

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 527% 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%

M2000M 29795
+437%
HD Graphics 5500 5544

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 437% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

M2000M 53
+467%
HD Graphics 5500 9

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 467% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 36
+1273%
HD Graphics 5500 3

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 1273% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 70
+471%
HD Graphics 5500 12

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 471% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 33
+1283%
HD Graphics 5500 2

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 1283% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 46
+545%
HD Graphics 5500 7

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 545% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 40
+511%
HD Graphics 5500 7

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 511% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 15
+1370%
HD Graphics 5500 1

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 1370% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 22
+421%
HD Graphics 5500 4

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 421% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M2000M 3
+3100%
HD Graphics 5500 0

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 3100% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 22
+421%
HD Graphics 5500 4

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 421% 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%

M2000M 36
+1273%
HD Graphics 5500 3

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 1273% in SPECviewperf 12 - Maya.

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 46
+545%
HD Graphics 5500 7

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 545% in SPECviewperf 12 - Catia.

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 70
+471%
HD Graphics 5500 12

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 471% in SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks.

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 33
+1283%
HD Graphics 5500 2

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 1283% in SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX.

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 40
+511%
HD Graphics 5500 7

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 511% in SPECviewperf 12 - Creo.

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 15
+1370%
HD Graphics 5500 1

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 1370% in SPECviewperf 12 - Medical.

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M2000M 3.2
+3100%
HD Graphics 5500 0.1

Quadro M2000M outperforms HD Graphics 5500 by 3100% 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:

900p75−80
+477%
13
−477%
Full HD32
+220%
10
−220%
4K11
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 no data
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 no data
Hitman 3 16−18 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 no data
Metro Exodus 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 no data
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 no data
Hitman 3 16−18 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 no data
Metro Exodus 27−30
+575%
4−5
−575%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 no data
Far Cry 5 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 no data
Hitman 3 12−14 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20 no data
Metro Exodus 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7 no data
Hitman 3 5−6 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+800%
1−2
−800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 no data
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10 no data
Metro Exodus 9−10 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 no data

This is how M2000M and HD Graphics 5500 compete in popular games:

  • M2000M is 477% faster in 900p
  • M2000M is 220% faster in 1080p
  • M2000M is 1000% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.95 1.50
Recency 2 October 2015 5 January 2015
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

The Quadro M2000M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 5500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000M is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics 5500 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 M2000M
Quadro M2000M
Intel HD Graphics 5500
HD Graphics 5500

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.


3.6 455 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1406 votes

Rate HD Graphics 5500 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.