AMD FirePro S10000 vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000 Comparison

The AMD FirePro S10000 and NVIDIA Quadro M5000 are both end-of-life professional workstation cards, but they represent very different design philosophies from their respective manufacturers. The data shows a clear, if narrow, performance edge for the AMD card in the two available benchmark tests, yet the overall system characteristics tell a more nuanced story about which card suits specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a straightforward picture in favor of the AMD FirePro S10000. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the FirePro S10000 scores 30,631 points against the Quadro M5000’s 29,481 points. This gives AMD a 3.9% lead in raw compute performance. The Vulkan results follow a similar pattern, with the FirePro S10000 achieving 34,145 points compared to the Quadro M5000’s 32,931 points, a 3.7% advantage. In both tests, the AMD card wins, giving it a 2-0 record in the head-to-head comparison.

However, the context of these scores matters. The FirePro S10000’s average benchmark score across all tests is 32,388, placing it at the 77th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro M5000’s average score is 31,206, which lands at the 76th percentile. The delta between their average scores is roughly 1.2% in AMD’s favor, which is marginal in real-world terms. The nearest rivals for the FirePro S10000 include the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (average score 32,456, a -0.2% difference) and the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (average score 32,540, a -0.5% difference). This indicates the FirePro S10000 sits in a tightly competitive cluster. For the Quadro M5000, its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q with an identical average score of 31,220 (0% delta), suggesting the M5000 is a solid mid-pack performer in its own right.

The margin between the two cards in the head-to-head tests is consistent, but the absolute numbers reveal that both are capable of high-end compute tasks. The FirePro S10000’s lead is real but not overwhelming; the Quadro M5000 is within striking distance in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro S10000 wins in both available benchmark categories: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. This suggests a general-purpose compute advantage that spans different API environments. The card’s higher raw FP32 throughput of 3.405 TFLOPS compared to the Quadro M5000’s 4.252 TFLOPS is interesting because the AMD card still manages to win in these tests despite a lower theoretical peak. The FirePro S10000 also boasts a wider memory bus at 384-bit versus the Quadro’s 256-bit, and higher memory bandwidth at 240.0 GB/s compared to 211.6 GB/s. These memory characteristics likely contribute to its benchmark victories, particularly in memory-sensitive compute tasks.

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000, despite losing both benchmark tests, has its own strengths in other areas. It offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory versus the FirePro S10000’s 3 GB, which is a significant advantage for workloads that require large datasets to reside in VRAM, such as high-resolution rendering or complex simulations. The Quadro also has a higher pixel rate (66.43 GPixel/s vs. 30.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (132.9 GTexel/s vs. 106.4 GTexel/s), indicating superior rasterization throughput for traditional graphics tasks. In scenarios where the workload is fill-rate bound rather than compute bound, the Quadro M5000 would likely pull ahead.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards reflects their respective generations and design goals. The AMD FirePro S10000 is built on the Tahiti chip using the GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². The card features 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation pipelines (ROPs). Its base clock is 825 MHz with a boost clock of 950 MHz, and memory runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 uses the GM204 chip based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, also on a 28 nm process from TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors onto a larger 398 mm² die, achieving a slightly higher transistor density of 13.1M / mm². The Quadro has more shading units at 2,048, more TMUs at 128, and double the ROPs at 64. Its base clock is 861 MHz, boosting to 1038 MHz, with memory at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective). The higher clock speeds and larger shader count give the Quadro a theoretical FP32 peak of 4.252 TFLOPS, which is about 25% higher than the FirePro S10000’s 3.405 TFLOPS.

API support differs notably. The FirePro S10000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the Quadro M5000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), indicating better feature-level compatibility for the NVIDIA card. OpenGL support is identical at 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: the FirePro S10000 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, whereas the Quadro M5000 supports a newer Vulkan 1.4. The power characteristics are also starkly different, with the TDP of the FirePro S10000 at 375 W compared to the Quadro M5000’s 150 W, a 225 W gap that has implications for system design.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 wins with a score of 30,631 against the NVIDIA Quadro M5000’s 29,481, a 3.9% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD FirePro S10000 has 3 GB. This gives the Quadro a significant advantage for memory-intensive workloads.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 has a TDP of 375 W and requires a 750 W suggested power supply with 2x 8-pin connectors. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has a TDP of 150 W, a 450 W suggested power supply, and needs only a single 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card has higher theoretical FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has a higher FP32 rating at 4.252 TFLOPS, compared to the AMD FirePro S10000’s 3.405 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each card?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 has an average benchmark score of 32,388, placing it at the 77th percentile. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has an average score of 31,206, at the 76th percentile.

Q: What is the release date for each card?

A: The AMD FirePro S10000 was released on November 11, 2012, while the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 was released on June 28, 2015.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD FirePro S10000 is the better choice for raw compute performance. It wins both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests by margins of 3.9% and 3.7%, respectively, and holds a higher average benchmark score overall. Its 384-bit memory bus and higher bandwidth appear to provide a tangible benefit in these synthetic workloads. For users whose primary concern is compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan environments, the FirePro S10000 is the data-backed winner.

However, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is the more balanced card for broader professional use. Its 8 GB of VRAM is more than double the FirePro S10000’s 3 GB, making it vastly more suitable for large-scale rendering, deep learning datasets, or any task that exceeds the AMD card’s memory capacity. The Quadro also has superior pixel and texture rates, suggesting better performance in traditional graphics pipelines. Furthermore, its significantly lower TDP of 150 W (versus 375 W) and more modest power supply requirement make it far easier to integrate into existing systems without major power delivery upgrades. The Quadro M5000 also offers newer API support, including DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, which future-proofs it for software that leverages these newer standards.

In practical terms, the choice depends on the workload. If the task is purely compute-bound and fits within 3 GB of memory, the FirePro S10000’s benchmark wins make it the pick. If the job requires larger memory footprints, benefits from higher fill rates, or demands lower system power draw, the Quadro M5000 is the logical selection despite its slight benchmark deficit.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards:

• Chip: AMD FirePro S10000 uses Tahiti; NVIDIA Quadro M5000 uses GM204.
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 vs. Maxwell 2.0.
• Generation: FirePro Server (Sx000) vs. Quadro Maxwell (Mx000).
• Transistors: 4,313 million vs. 5,200 million.
• Die Size: 352 mm² vs. 398 mm².
• Transistor Density: 12.3M / mm² vs. 13.1M / mm².
• Base Clock: 825 MHz vs. 861 MHz.
• Boost Clock: 950 MHz vs. 1038 MHz.
• Memory Clock: 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) vs. 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: 3 GB vs. 8 GB.
• Memory Bus Width: 384 bit vs. 256 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: 240.0 GB/s vs. 211.6 GB/s.
• Shading Units: 1792 vs. 2048.
• TMUs: 112 vs. 128.
• ROPs: 32 vs. 64.
• Pixel Rate: 30.40 GPixel/s vs. 66.43 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: 106.4 GTexel/s vs. 132.9 GTexel/s.
• FP32: 3.405 TFLOPS vs. 4.252 TFLOPS.
• TDP: 375 W vs. 150 W.
• Power Connectors: 2x 8-pin vs. 1x 6-pin.
• Suggested PSU: 750 W vs. 450 W.
• Display Outputs: 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 vs. 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2.
• DirectX Support: 12 (11_1) vs. 12 (12_1).
• Vulkan Support: 1.2.170 vs. 1.4.
• Length: 305 mm (12 inches) vs. 267 mm (10.5 inches).
• Release Date: November 11, 2012 vs. June 28, 2015.
• Predecessor: FirePro Terascale vs. Quadro Kepler.
• Successor: Radeon Pro GCN vs. Quadro Pascal.