AMD FirePro M5100 vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if narrow, winner. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 takes the single head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 7289 against the AMD FirePro M5100's 6830. That is a 6.7% advantage for the NVIDIA card. Based strictly on this benchmark, the Quadro 5000 is the faster GPU. Its percentile ranking of 40 versus the FirePro M5100's 38 reinforces this, though both sit in the lower-middle range of all GPUs.

However, the choice is not simply about raw score. The Quadro 5000 is a desktop card, as indicated by its dual-slot form factor and 1x 6-pin power connector. The FirePro M5100 is an MXM Module, meaning it is designed for mobile workstations. A user building or upgrading a desktop workstation should choose the Quadro 5000, as it is the only one of the two that can be installed in a standard desktop chassis. A user repairing or speccing a laptop must choose the FirePro M5100, as the Quadro 5000 is physically incompatible with the MXM-A (3.0) interface. In a purely performance-driven desktop context, the Quadro 5000 is the pick. In a mobile context, the FirePro M5100 is the only option. The data also shows the FirePro M5100 is a later release, launching in October 2013 compared to the Quadro's February 2011, but the newer part does not outscore the older one in this test.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 uses the GF100 chip, which is based on the Fermi architecture. This chip is manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The AMD FirePro M5100 uses the Venus chip, which is based on the GCN 1.0 architecture, and is also built by TSMC, but on a much newer 28 nm process. The process node difference is significant: 40 nm versus 28 nm. This is reflected in the transistor density; the AMD chip packs 12.2M transistors per mm², while the NVIDIA chip has a density of just 5.9M per mm².

The physical size and complexity of the chips differ greatly. The GF100 is a massive die, measuring 529 mm², and contains 3,100 million transistors. The Venus chip is far smaller at 123 mm², containing 1,500 million transistors. Despite being smaller, the AMD chip has a higher transistor count per area, showcasing the density advantage of its newer process. The core configurations also differ. The Quadro 5000 features 352 shading units, 44 texture mapping units, and 40 ROPs. The FirePro M5100 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The AMD GPU has more shading units but far fewer ROPs, which affects its pixel processing throughput.

Clock speeds are a major point of difference. The Quadro 5000's core clock is not listed in the data, but its memory runs at 750 MHz, or 3 Gbps effective. The FirePro M5100 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 775 MHz, with memory running at 1125 MHz, or 4.5 Gbps effective. In terms of API support, both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. However, the AMD card has a higher DirectX feature level (11_1 versus 11_0) and supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA card has no Vulkan support listed. The AMD card's memory interface is narrower (128 bit versus 320 bit) and has less total memory (2 GB versus 2.5 GB), but its higher effective memory clock does not compensate, resulting in lower memory bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data provides only one test, the Geekbench OpenCL score. In this single metric, the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 wins outright, with a 6.7% higher score than the AMD FirePro M5100. This suggests that for general compute workloads using OpenCL, the Quadro 5000 has the advantage. Its higher score of 7289 versus 6830 indicates better raw processing capability in this specific test.

The AMD FirePro M5100 does not win the head-to-head benchmark, but it has other advantages in the data. It is a mobile part, which means it fits into laptops, a category where the Quadro 5000 cannot compete. It also has a higher FP32 throughput in terms of raw GFLOPS: 992.0 GFLOPS versus 722.3 GFLOPS. This suggests that in some floating-point compute tasks, the AMD architecture might be more capable, even though it loses the OpenCL test. Furthermore, the FirePro M5100 has a higher texture fill rate of 31.00 GTexel/s compared to the Quadro's 22.57 GTexel/s. The AMD card also has a higher pixel rate of 12.40 GPixel/s versus 11.29 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA card, despite having fewer ROPs. These figures indicate that the FirePro M5100 wins on theoretical peak fill rates, while the Quadro 5000 wins on the actual benchmark.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is faster, scoring 7289 compared to the AMD FirePro M5100's 6830, a 6.7% difference.

Q: Are these two graphics cards comparable for the same type of computer?

A: No. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the AMD FirePro M5100 is an MXM Module designed for portable devices.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 has significantly more shading units, with 640, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro 5000's 352.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has much higher memory bandwidth at 120.0 GB/s, while the AMD FirePro M5100 has 72.00 GB/s.

Q: Does the AMD card support any newer graphics APIs?

A: Yes, the AMD FirePro M5100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has no Vulkan support listed. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Which GPU has a higher theoretical pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 has a higher pixel rate of 12.40 GPixel/s, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro 5000's 11.29 GPixel/s.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single available head-to-head test is the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark. In this test, the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 scored 7289 points. The AMD FirePro M5100 scored 6830 points. This gives the NVIDIA card a win with a delta of 6.7%. This is the only benchmark in the data, and it is the decisive factor for overall performance comparison.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the Quadro 5000's score of 7289 places it just ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, which scores 7222, a 0.9% difference. It is also 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (7203) and 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE (7171). The FirePro M5100's score of 6830 is 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946) and 2.1% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6975). It is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6764) and 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6698). This shows that while the Quadro 5000 wins the head-to-head, both cards are closely matched with their respective peers in this performance tier.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification. The most obvious difference is form factor: the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is a dual-slot desktop card, while the AMD FirePro M5100 is an MXM Module. The Quadro uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 bus interface, while the FirePro uses MXM-A (3.0).

The manufacturing process differs, with the Quadro on a 40 nm node and the FirePro on a 28 nm node. The chip sizes are vastly different: the GF100 die measures 529 mm² and contains 3,100 million transistors, while the Venus die measures 123 mm² and contains 1,500 million transistors. Transistor density is 5.9M per mm² for NVIDIA and 12.2M per mm² for AMD.

Core configurations are different. The Quadro has 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The FirePro has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Clock speeds are listed differently; the Quadro's core clock is not specified, but its memory runs at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The FirePro has a base clock of 725 MHz, a boost clock of 775 MHz, and memory at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective).

Memory specifications differ significantly. The Quadro has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 120.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro has a higher power draw at 152 W, whereas the FirePro's TDP is not listed. The Quadro requires a 450 W power supply and has a 1x 6-pin connector; the FirePro has no power connector listed as it is portable-device dependent.

Display outputs are another key difference. The Quadro offers 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort. The FirePro's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent." In terms of API support, the Quadro supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but only the FirePro lists Vulkan support (1.2.170). The Quadro has a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD, while the FirePro has no launch MSRP listed.