AMD FirePro D500 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is the decisive winner in every measurable category where both cards have recorded data. Its average benchmark score of 21,629 places it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD FirePro D500 sits at 18,533 in the 62nd percentile. The only direct head-to-head result, Geekbench Vulkan, shows the Quadro RTX 5000 scoring 92,309 against the FirePro D500's 18,533, a 398.1% advantage. For any workload involving Vulkan, modern graphics APIs, or compute-heavy tasks, the Quadro RTX 5000 is the only defensible choice.

The FirePro D500 is a legacy part from an earlier architecture generation. It has no Vulkan-independent benchmark data beyond that single test, no DirectX results, and no compute scores recorded. Buyers should choose it only if the specific requirement is the 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and SDI output configuration, which the Quadro does not offer. Otherwise, the data points overwhelmingly to the NVIDIA card.

Architecture Differences

The Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 chip built on TSMC's 12 nm process, featuring 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. The FirePro D500 uses the Tahiti chip on a 28 nm process with 4,313 million transistors and a 352 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: 25.0 million transistors per mm² for NVIDIA versus 12.3 million per mm² for AMD.

The Quadro RTX 5000 belongs to the Turing architecture (Quadro Turing generation) and implements 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. It also includes 48 ray tracing cores and 384 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the FirePro D500. The AMD card, based on GCN 1.0, has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor hardware.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The Quadro RTX 5000 carries 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro D500 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, but bandwidth is only 243.8 GB/s. The NVIDIA card also has a large capacity advantage for datasets that exceed 3 GB.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The Quadro RTX 5000 runs at 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost, while the FirePro D500's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database. The NVIDIA memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) for AMD. Pixel rate is 116.2 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 348.5 GTexel/s versus 69.60 GTexel/s.

API support also favors the newer card: the Quadro RTX 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro D500 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card is rated at 230 W TDP with a suggested 550 W PSU; the AMD card consumes more at 274 W with a suggested 600 W PSU, despite delivering far lower performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one common benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench Vulkan. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 92,309, while the AMD FirePro D500 scores 18,533. This represents a 398.1% advantage for NVIDIA, meaning the Quadro RTX 5000 is nearly five times faster in this workload. This is not a marginal difference; it is a generation-scale gap.

Beyond that single shared test, the Quadro RTX 5000 has a full benchmark profile. It scores 78,999 in Geekbench OpenCL, 15,616 in Passmark G3D, 6,525 in Passmark GPU Compute, 709 in Passmark G2D, 195 in Passmark DirectX 9, 140 in DirectX 11, 113 in DirectX 10, and 59 in DirectX 12. The FirePro D500 has no recorded scores in any of these tests. The absence of data is itself informative: the AMD card cannot be evaluated outside Vulkan, and even there it trails by a wide margin.

The Quadro RTX 5000's nearest rivals in the database are the GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (average score 21,856, only 1% higher), the RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379, 1.2% lower), the Radeon HD 8970M (21,237, 1.8% lower), and the Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153, 2.3% lower). This places the Quadro RTX 5000 in a competitive mid-range bracket among all GPUs, despite being an end-of-life workstation part.

The FirePro D500's nearest rivals are the Radeon RX 560X (18,626, 0.5% higher), the Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18,685, 0.8% higher), the Intel Arc A770M (18,383, 0.8% lower), and the Radeon RX 460 (18,373, 0.9% lower). Its average score of 18,533 puts it in a much lower performance class, roughly equivalent to entry-level consumer cards from years later.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 92,309 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 18,533 for the AMD FirePro D500, a 398.1% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro D500 support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: No. The FirePro D500 has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 48 ray tracing cores and 384 tensor cores.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro D500 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 243.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Quadro RTX 5000 has a 230 W TDP and a suggested 550 W power supply. The FirePro D500 has a 274 W TDP and a suggested 600 W power supply, despite being the slower card.

Q: Which card has better display output options?

A: The FirePro D500 offers 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI. The Quadro RTX 5000 offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. The choice depends on whether SDI output is required.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are end-of-life products. The Quadro RTX 5000 was released in 2018 and the FirePro D500 in 2014.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 wins in every benchmark category with recorded data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 78,999 indicates strong general-purpose compute performance. Passmark G3D at 15,616 and GPU Compute at 6,525 show solid rasterization and compute capability. Even the DirectX scores, ranging from 59 in DirectX 12 to 195 in DirectX 9, cover a broader API span than the AMD card can manage. The 16 GB memory capacity and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets, and the presence of ray tracing and tensor cores opens workloads that the FirePro D500 cannot address at all.

The AMD FirePro D500's only advantage is its display output configuration. With 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 and 1x SDI, it is built for multi-display or broadcast-style output where SDI is a hard requirement. The Quadro RTX 5000's 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C covers fewer conventional display outputs and lacks SDI entirely. For a workstation that must drive multiple SDI monitors or feed broadcast equipment directly, the FirePro D500 has a niche role. Its 243.8 GB/s bandwidth and 2.227 TFLOPS FP32 performance are far below the Quadro, so any compute or modern graphics task will favor NVIDIA.

The Quadro RTX 5000 also wins on efficiency in practical terms. It delivers 11.15 TFLOPS FP32 at 230 W TDP, while the FirePro D500 delivers 2.227 TFLOPS at 274 W. The NVIDIA card produces roughly five times the FP32 throughput while drawing less power. The suggested PSU rating of 550 W versus 600 W reinforces that the Quadro is the easier card to integrate into existing systems.

For users constrained to the FirePro D500's era or driver stack, the card still functions, but the data shows it belongs to a different performance tier. Its average benchmark score of 18,533 is close to the Radeon RX 460 (18,373) and below the Radeon RX 560X (18,626). The Quadro RTX 5000, by contrast, sits near the GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (21,856) and above the RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379). That is roughly a 17% average score advantage for NVIDIA, and the Vulkan gap is far larger.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | AMD FirePro D500 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |

| Process node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 13,600 million | 4,313 million |

| Die size | 545 mm² | 352 mm² |

| Transistor density | 25.0M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Shading units | 3072 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 192 | 96 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray tracing cores | 48 | None |

| Tensor cores | 384 | None |

| Base clock | 1620 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost clock | 1815 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 16 GB | 3 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bus | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 243.8 GB/s |

| Pixel rate | 116.2 GPixel/s | 23.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 348.5 GTexel/s | 69.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 11.15 TFLOPS | 2.227 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 22.30 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 230 W | 274 W |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 600 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | Not recorded |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x SDI |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 279 mm (11 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | Not recorded |

| Release date | 2018-08-12 | 2014-01-17 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Volta | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | Workstation Ampere | Radeon Instinct |

| Launch MSRP | 2,299 USD | Not recorded |

The two cards share only a few traits: both are dual-slot, both use PCIe 3.0 x16, both support OpenGL 4.6, and both are end-of-life. Every other specification favors the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 by a substantial margin. The FirePro D500's only unique feature is the SDI output, which may justify its existence in specific broadcast or medical display environments. For all other purposes, the recorded data leaves no ambiguity about which card delivers more performance.