GeForce GTX 850M vs Quadro M5000M

Place in performance ranking	287	540
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	8.08	3.93
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code name	GM204	N15P-GT
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	2 October 2015 (8 years ago)	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Current price	$468	$163

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

M5000M has 106% better value for money than GTX 850M.

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 cores	1,536	640
CUDA cores	no data	640
Core clock speed	962 MHz	Up to 936 MHz
Boost clock speed	1051 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,200 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	93.60	36.08
Floating-point performance	2,995 gflops	1,155 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M5000M and GeForce GTX 850M 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 size	large	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	no 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 type	GDDR5	DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3 or GDDR5
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz	Up to 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	80.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	no data	+
HDCP content protection	no data	+
Display Port	1.2	no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	no data	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	no data	+

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	no data	+
Optimus	+	+
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data
Ansel	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.0	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	1.1.126
CUDA	5.2	+

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.

M5000M 17.95
+176%

GTX 850M 6.51

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 176% 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%

M5000M 6932
+176%

GTX 850M 2514

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 176% 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%

M5000M 11845
+170%

GTX 850M 4386

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 170% 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%

M5000M 9228
+199%

GTX 850M 3086

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 199% 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%

M5000M 63738
+191%

GTX 850M 21873

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 191% 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%

M5000M 22261
+131%

GTX 850M 9621

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 131% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Benchmark coverage: 5%

M5000M 22787
+162%

GTX 850M 8686

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 162% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Benchmark coverage: 4%

M5000M 20269
+118%

GTX 850M 9302

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 118% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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%

M5000M 112
+169%

GTX 850M 42

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 169% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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%

M5000M 63
+152%

GTX 850M 25

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 152% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 71
+285%

GTX 850M 19

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 285% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 103
+698%

GTX 850M 13

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 698% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 88
+4505%

GTX 850M 2

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 4505% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 97
+576%

GTX 850M 14

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 576% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 82
+287%

GTX 850M 21

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 287% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 32
+411%

GTX 850M 6

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 411% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 44
+202%

GTX 850M 15

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 202% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

M5000M 7

GTX 850M 9
+32.4%

GeForce GTX 850M outperforms Quadro M5000M by 32% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 44
+202%

GTX 850M 15

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 202% 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%

M5000M 71
+285%

GTX 850M 19

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 285% in SPECviewperf 12 - Maya.

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 97
+576%

GTX 850M 14

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 576% in SPECviewperf 12 - Catia.

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 103
+698%

GTX 850M 13

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 698% in SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks.

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 87
+4500%

GTX 850M 2

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 4500% in SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX.

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 82
+287%

GTX 850M 21

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 287% in SPECviewperf 12 - Creo.

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 32
+411%

GTX 850M 6

Quadro M5000M outperforms GeForce GTX 850M by 411% in SPECviewperf 12 - Medical.

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

Benchmark coverage: 2%

M5000M 7.1

GTX 850M 9.4
+32.4%

GeForce GTX 850M outperforms Quadro M5000M by 32% 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:

900p	230−240 +174%	84 −174%
Full HD	78 +136%	33 −136%
4K	30−35 +173%	11 −173%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

27−30

no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33	no data
Battlefield 5	55−60	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	no data
Far Cry 5	40−45	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50	no data
Forza Horizon 4	80−85	no data
Hitman 3	35−40	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75	no data
Metro Exodus	60−65	no data
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60	no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33	no data
Battlefield 5	55−60	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	no data
Far Cry 5	40−45	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50	no data
Forza Horizon 4	80−85	no data
Hitman 3	35−40	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75	no data
Metro Exodus	60−65	no data
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	67	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60	no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	no data
Far Cry 5	40−45	no data
Forza Horizon 4	80−85	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	38	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60	no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55

no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40	no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11	no data
Far Cry 5	30−33	no data
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	no data
Hitman 3	21−24	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40	no data
Metro Exodus	30−35	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14	no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−33

no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14	no data
Hitman 3	12−14	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	no data
Far Cry 5	10−11	no data
Forza Horizon 4	24−27	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22	no data
Metro Exodus	16−18	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8	no data