Radeon Pro 5600M vs Quadro M2000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000M and Radeon Pro 5600M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

M2000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
8.77

Pro 5600M outperforms M2000M by a whopping 168% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking496240
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.2032.95
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Navi 12
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date3 December 2015 (9 years ago)15 June 2020 (4 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 cores6402560
Core clock speed1029 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1098 MHz1030 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate43.92164.8
Floating-point processing power1.405 TFLOPS5.274 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs40160

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-A (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5HBM2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz770 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s394.2 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA5.0-

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.

M2000M 8.77
Pro 5600M 23.46
+168%

  • Passmark

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.

M2000M 3450
Pro 5600M 9232
+168%

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 HD36
−164%
95−100
+164%
4K11
−145%
27−30
+145%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
Atomic Heart 21−24
−190%
60−65
+190%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−175%
40−45
+175%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−182%
45−50
+182%
Atomic Heart 21−24
−190%
60−65
+190%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−175%
40−45
+175%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−182%
45−50
+182%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−181%
75−80
+181%
Fortnite 50−55
−122%
110−120
+122%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−205%
60−65
+205%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−190%
85−90
+190%
Valorant 80−85
−88.1%
150−160
+88.1%
Atomic Heart 21−24
−190%
60−65
+190%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−175%
40−45
+175%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
−90.8%
250−260
+90.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−182%
45−50
+182%
Dota 2 60−65
−87.3%
110−120
+87.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−181%
75−80
+181%
Fortnite 50−55
−122%
110−120
+122%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−205%
60−65
+205%
Grand Theft Auto V 30
−177%
80−85
+177%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−188%
45−50
+188%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−190%
85−90
+190%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
−187%
65−70
+187%
Valorant 80−85
−88.1%
150−160
+88.1%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−175%
40−45
+175%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−182%
45−50
+182%
Dota 2 60−65
−87.3%
110−120
+87.3%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−181%
75−80
+181%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−143%
90−95
+143%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−205%
60−65
+205%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
−190%
85−90
+190%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−371%
65−70
+371%
Valorant 80−85
−88.1%
150−160
+88.1%
Fortnite 50−55
−122%
110−120
+122%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−146%
160−170
+146%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
−264%
40−45
+264%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−233%
30−33
+233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−307%
170−180
+307%
Valorant 95−100
−108%
190−200
+108%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−232%
60−65
+232%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−214%
21−24
+214%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−200%
50−55
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−190%
55−60
+190%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
−186%
40−45
+186%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−185%
35−40
+185%
Fortnite 16−18
−212%
50−55
+212%
Atomic Heart 7−8
−157%
18−20
+157%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−121%
40−45
+121%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−375%
18−20
+375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−267%
30−35
+267%
Valorant 40−45
−195%
130−140
+195%
Battlefield 5 9−10
−278%
30−35
+278%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Dota 2 30−35
−142%
75−80
+142%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−178%
24−27
+178%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−186%
40−45
+186%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−188%
21−24
+188%
Fortnite 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how M2000M and Pro 5600M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5600M is 164% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5600M is 145% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro 5600M is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 5600M is ahead in 66 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.77 23.46
Recency 3 December 2015 15 June 2020
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 50 Watt

Pro 5600M has a 167.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 10% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000M in performance tests.

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
AMD Radeon Pro 5600M
Radeon Pro 5600M

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.


3.6
507 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon Pro 5600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2000M or Radeon Pro 5600M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.