Quadro T500 Mobile vs Radeon Pro W5700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro W5700 with Quadro T500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Pro W5700
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 205 Watt
38.97
+328%

Pro W5700 outperforms T500 Mobile by a whopping 328% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking112474
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation46.53no data
Power efficiency13.5436.01
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNavi 10TU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date19 November 2019 (4 years ago)2 December 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores2304896
Core clock speed1243 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speed1930 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistors10,300 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)205 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate277.994.92
Floating-point processing power8.893 TFLOPS3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs14456

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length305 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s80 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 Connectors5x mini-DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-CNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA-7.5

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 HD150−160
+317%
36
−317%
1440p60−65
+300%
15
−300%
4K70−75
+312%
17
−312%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Pro W5700 and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Pro W5700 is 317% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W5700 is 300% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W5700 is 312% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 38.97 9.10
Recency 19 November 2019 2 December 2020
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 205 Watt 18 Watt

Pro W5700 has a 328.2% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

T500 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 1038.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W5700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T500 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W5700 is a workstation card while Quadro T500 Mobile 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.

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.


AMD Radeon Pro W5700
Radeon Pro W5700
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 91 vote

Rate Radeon Pro W5700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 102 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.