GeForce GT 650M SLI vs Quadro M5500
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro M5500 with GeForce GT 650M SLI, including specs and performance data.
Quadro M5500 outperforms GT 650M SLI by a whopping 305% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 264 | 625 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | GM204 | N13E-GE |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 April 2016 (8 years ago) | 22 March 2012 (12 years ago) |
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 | 2048 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 1139 MHz | 790 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1140 MHz | 835 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5200 Million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 149.1 | no data |
| Floating-point performance | 4.772 gflops | no data |
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 | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2x2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 2x 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6606 MHz | 4000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 211 GB/s | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | no data |
| Display Port | 1.2 | no data |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
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 |
| VR Ready | + | 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.
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
| CUDA | + | + |
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 | 300−350
+280%
| 79
−280%
|
| Full HD | 220−230
+300%
| 55
−300%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+267%
|
9−10
−267%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+580%
|
5−6
−580%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+415%
|
12−14
−415%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+267%
|
9−10
−267%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+336%
|
10−12
−336%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 55−60
+293%
|
14−16
−293%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+294%
|
30−35
−294%
|
| Hitman 3 | 40−45
+264%
|
10−12
−264%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 95−100
+197%
|
30−35
−197%
|
| Metro Exodus | 70−75
+492%
|
12−14
−492%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
+293%
|
14−16
−293%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 65−70
+278%
|
18−20
−278%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 90−95
+97.9%
|
45−50
−97.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+580%
|
5−6
−580%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+415%
|
12−14
−415%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+267%
|
9−10
−267%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+336%
|
10−12
−336%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 55−60
+293%
|
14−16
−293%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+294%
|
30−35
−294%
|
| Hitman 3 | 40−45
+264%
|
10−12
−264%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 95−100
+197%
|
30−35
−197%
|
| Metro Exodus | 70−75
+492%
|
12−14
−492%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
+293%
|
14−16
−293%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 65−70
+278%
|
18−20
−278%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+156%
|
18−20
−156%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 90−95
+97.9%
|
45−50
−97.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 45−50
+229%
|
14−16
−229%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+580%
|
5−6
−580%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+267%
|
9−10
−267%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+336%
|
10−12
−336%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+294%
|
30−35
−294%
|
| Hitman 3 | 40−45
+264%
|
10−12
−264%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 95−100
+197%
|
30−35
−197%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 65−70
+278%
|
18−20
−278%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+156%
|
18−20
−156%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 90−95
+97.9%
|
45−50
−97.9%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
+293%
|
14−16
−293%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+333%
|
9−10
−333%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 30−35
+288%
|
8−9
−288%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 21−24
+320%
|
5−6
−320%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+300%
|
6−7
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+858%
|
12−14
−858%
|
| Hitman 3 | 24−27
+167%
|
9−10
−167%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+1167%
|
3−4
−1167%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40−45
+320%
|
10−11
−320%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 120−130
+275%
|
30−35
−275%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+278%
|
9−10
−278%
|
4K
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 16−18
+433%
|
3−4
−433%
|
| Hitman 3 | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 100−110
+1225%
|
8−9
−1225%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+600%
|
4−5
−600%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+360%
|
5−6
−360%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+200%
|
6−7
−200%
|
This is how Quadro M5500 and GT 650M SLI compete in popular games:
- Quadro M5500 is 280% faster in 900p
- Quadro M5500 is 300% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M5500 is 2000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, Quadro M5500 surpassed GT 650M SLI in all 68 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 20.52 | 5.07 |
| Recency | 4 April 2016 | 22 March 2012 |
Quadro M5500 has a 304.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 4 years.
The Quadro M5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 650M SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro M5500 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 650M SLI 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.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
