Quadro M1000M vs M5500

Place in performance ranking	254	499
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.75	0.83
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2018)	Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code name	GM204	GM107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	4 April 2016 (8 years ago)	2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$200.89
Current price	$1700	$706 (3.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro M5500 has 231% better value for money than M1000M.

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	512
Core clock speed	1139 MHz	993 MHz
Boost clock speed	1140 MHz	1072 MHz
Number of transistors	5200 Million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	149.1	31.78
Floating-point performance	no data	1,017 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M5500 and Quadro M1000M 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	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB/4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6606 MHz	5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	211 GB/s	80 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
Display Port	1.2	1.2
G-SYNC support	+	no 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	+	+
Mosaic	+	+
VR Ready	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	+
Optimus	+	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12
Shader Model	5.0	5.0
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	+
CUDA	+	5.0

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.

Quadro M5500 20.45
+176%

M1000M 7.42

M5500 outperforms M1000M by 176% based on our aggregated 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%

Quadro M5500 7915
+175%

M1000M 2873

M5500 outperforms M1000M by 175% in Passmark.

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	100−110 +156%	39 −156%
4K	35−40 +169%	13 −169%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

30−35
+175%

12−14

−175%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +173%	14−16 −173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +260%	10−11 −260%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +183%	24−27 −183%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +152%	21−24 −152%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +200%	18−20 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +189%	18−20 −189%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +169%	24−27 −169%
Hitman 3	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +187%	14−16 −187%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +154%	12−14 −154%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +159%	16−18 −159%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +225%	12−14 −225%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +173%	14−16 −173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +260%	10−11 −260%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +183%	24−27 −183%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +152%	21−24 −152%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +200%	18−20 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +189%	18−20 −189%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +169%	24−27 −169%
Hitman 3	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +187%	14−16 −187%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +200%	10−12 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +154%	12−14 −154%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +159%	16−18 −159%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +137%	19 −137%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +225%	12−14 −225%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +173%	14−16 −173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +260%	10−11 −260%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +183%	24−27 −183%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +200%	18−20 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +189%	18−20 −189%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +169%	24−27 −169%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +309%	11 −309%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +225%	12−14 −225%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−35 +182%	10−12 −182%
Hitman 3	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +108%	12−14 −108%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +300%	5−6 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +160%	10−11 −160%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +267%	6−7 −267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Battlefield 5	45−50 +400%	9−10 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +183%	12−14 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +290%	10−11 −290%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +242%	12−14 −242%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +214%	7−8 −214%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Hitman 3	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +367%	3−4 −367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +200%	7 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22 +122%	9−10 −122%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +263%	8−9 −263%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%