RTX A500 vs Quadro M5000M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro M5000M with RTX A500, including specs and performance data.
M5000M outperforms RTX A500 by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 327 | 337 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 12.40 | 19.75 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019) | Ampere (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | GM204 | GA107 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 18 August 2015 (9 years ago) | 10 November 2021 (3 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 cores | 1,536 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 975 MHz | 1440 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1051 MHz | 1770 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,200 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 60 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 93.60 | 113.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.995 TFLOPS | 7.25 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 32 |
| TMUs | 96 | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1253 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 160 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 |
| Display Port | 1.2 | no 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.
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 5.2 | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
- 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.
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 | 84
+5%
| 80−85
−5%
|
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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+7.8%
|
90−95
−7.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+20%
|
30−33
−20%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+10.8%
|
65−70
−10.8%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+7.8%
|
90−95
−7.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+20%
|
30−33
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+14%
|
50−55
−14%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+9.4%
|
85−90
−9.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+8%
|
50−55
−8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+10.8%
|
120−130
−10.8%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+10.8%
|
65−70
−10.8%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 95−100
+7.8%
|
90−95
−7.8%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220
+8%
|
200−210
−8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+20%
|
30−33
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+7.4%
|
95−100
−7.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+14%
|
50−55
−14%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+9.4%
|
85−90
−9.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+8%
|
50−55
−8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+20%
|
30−33
−20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 67
+11.7%
|
60−65
−11.7%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+10.8%
|
120−130
−10.8%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+10.8%
|
65−70
−10.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+20%
|
30−33
−20%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+7.4%
|
95−100
−7.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+14%
|
50−55
−14%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 30−35
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+6.7%
|
60−65
−6.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 38
+8.6%
|
35−40
−8.6%
|
| Valorant | 130−140
+10.8%
|
120−130
−10.8%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+9.4%
|
85−90
−9.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+13.3%
|
30−33
−13.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
+13.6%
|
110−120
−13.6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+16.7%
|
24−27
−16.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+8%
|
150−160
−8%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+11.3%
|
150−160
−11.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+6.7%
|
45−50
−6.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+8.6%
|
35−40
−8.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+7.5%
|
40−45
−7.5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Fortnite | 35−40
+11.4%
|
35−40
−11.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+14.8%
|
27−30
−14.8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+14.3%
|
21−24
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+6.7%
|
90−95
−6.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+19%
|
21−24
−19%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
+9.1%
|
55−60
−9.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
This is how M5000M and RTX A500 compete in popular games:
- M5000M is 5% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 16.63 | 15.89 |
| Recency | 18 August 2015 | 10 November 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 60 Watt |
M5000M has a 4.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RTX A500, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M5000M and RTX A500.
Be aware that Quadro M5000M is a mobile workstation card while RTX A500 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
