AMD FirePro S7150 vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 records an average benchmark score of 31206, while the AMD FirePro S7150 records 28117. That puts the Quadro M5000 roughly 11% higher overall.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The Quadro M5000 scores 29481, and the FirePro S7150 scores 26543. The Quadro M5000 wins by 11.1% in this test.

Q: Which card wins in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The Quadro M5000 scores 32931, versus 29690 for the FirePro S7150. The margin is 10.9% in favor of the Quadro M5000.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The Quadro M5000 has a memory bandwidth of 211.6 GB/s, while the FirePro S7150 has 160.0 GB/s. Both use 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Do both cards have the same power draw?

A: Yes, both are rated at 150 W TDP and require a single 6-pin power connector, with a suggested 450 W power supply.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The Quadro M5000 is dual-slot and 267 mm long, while the FirePro S7150 is single-slot and 241 mm long. Both are 111 mm tall.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is built on the GM204 chip using Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.1M per mm². The AMD FirePro S7150 uses the Tonga chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, also on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die, yielding 13.7M per mm².

Both cards feature 2048 shading units and 128 texture mapping units. The key architectural split comes at the render output stage: the Quadro M5000 has 64 ROPs, while the FirePro S7150 has only 32 ROPs. This directly impacts pixel throughput, with the Quadro M5000 delivering 66.43 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s for the AMD card.

Clock behavior differs as well. The Quadro M5000 lists a base clock of 861 MHz and a boost clock of 1038 MHz. The FirePro S7150 does not list base or boost clocks in the database, only a memory clock of 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The Quadro M5000's memory runs at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective), which explains its higher bandwidth of 211.6 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s.

The compute capabilities diverge in FP16 throughput. The FirePro S7150 offers 7.537 TFLOPS FP16 (rated at 2:1 ratio), while the Quadro M5000 has no listed FP16 figure. For FP32, the Quadro M5000 leads with 4.252 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS for the FirePro S7150.

API support shows a generational gap. The Quadro M5000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro S7150 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card also has display outputs (1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2), while the FirePro S7150 has no display outputs at all, reflecting its server-oriented positioning.

Both cards are end-of-life products. The Quadro M5000 was released in June 2015, with the FirePro S7150 following in January 2016. The Quadro M5000's predecessor is Quadro Kepler and its successor is Quadro Pascal. The FirePro S7150's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro GCN.

The Verdict

The measured data consistently favors the NVIDIA Quadro M5000. It wins both head-to-head benchmark tests, records a higher average score (31206 versus 28117), and sits at the 76th percentile versus the FirePro S7150's 73rd percentile. The Quadro M5000 also leads in memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute.

The FirePro S7150 does have a single-slot form factor, making it physically thinner than the dual-slot Quadro M5000. It also offers FP16 throughput at 7.537 TFLOPS, which the Quadro M5000 does not list. For server environments where density matters and FP16 workloads are relevant, the FirePro S7150 has a specific niche. However, for general professional workloads measured by OpenCL and Vulkan, the Quadro M5000 is the stronger performer.

The launch MSRP for the FirePro S7150 is 2,399 USD. The Quadro M5000 has no listed launch MSRP in the database. Users choosing between these two end-of-life cards should prioritize the Quadro M5000 for raw benchmark performance and display connectivity, or the FirePro S7150 for single-slot server installations and FP16 compute.

Specification Differences

The two cards share several specifications: both have 8 GB GDDR5 memory, 256-bit memory bus, 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 28 nm process, TSMC foundry, 150 W TDP, 1x 6-pin power connector, 450 W suggested PSU, PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and 111 mm height.

The differences are as follows:

• Chip: GM204 (NVIDIA) versus Tonga (AMD)
• Architecture: Maxwell 2.0 versus GCN 3.0
• Transistors: 5,200 million versus 5,000 million
• Die size: 398 mm² versus 366 mm²
• Transistor density: 13.1M / mm² versus 13.7M / mm²
• Base clock: 861 MHz versus none listed
• Boost clock: 1038 MHz versus none listed
• Memory clock: 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective)
• Memory bandwidth: 211.6 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s
• ROPs: 64 versus 32
• Pixel rate: 66.43 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 132.9 GTexel/s versus 117.8 GTexel/s
• FP32: 4.252 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS
• FP16: none listed versus 7.537 TFLOPS (2:1)
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus Single-slot
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 versus no outputs
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.2.170
• Length: 267 mm versus 241 mm
• Release date: June 2015 versus January 2016
• Predecessor: Quadro Kepler versus FirePro Terascale
• Successor: Quadro Pascal versus Radeon Pro GCN

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these cards. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro M5000 scores 29481 against 26543 for the FirePro S7150, a delta of 11.1% in NVIDIA's favor. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Quadro M5000 scores 32931 against 29690, a delta of 10.9%. The Quadro M5000 wins both tests, giving it 2 wins and 0 losses in the head-to-head record.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this pattern. The Quadro M5000 sits at 31206, placing it among rivals like the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q (31220, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (31087, 0.4% delta), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31532, -1% delta), and the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31676, -1.5% delta). The FirePro S7150 at 28117 sits near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28020, 0.3% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X (27973, 0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27883, 0.8% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27839, 1% delta).

The performance gap in the head-to-head tests is consistent across both API workloads. The 11.1% OpenCL margin and 10.9% Vulkan margin are nearly identical, suggesting the Quadro M5000's advantage is not API-specific but rather a general compute lead. This aligns with its higher FP32 throughput (4.252 TFLOPS versus 3.768 TFLOPS) and higher texture rate (132.9 GTexel/s versus 117.8 GTexel/s).

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 wins in every measured benchmark category available in the database. Its 64 ROPs give it a 2.26x pixel rate advantage (66.43 GPixel/s versus 29.44 GPixel/s), which matters for geometry-heavy scenes and high-resolution rasterization. Its memory bandwidth of 211.6 GB/s is 32% higher than the FirePro S7150's 160.0 GB/s, benefiting texture-heavy workloads and large data transfers.

The Quadro M5000 also wins on API feature level. Its DirectX 12 (12_1) support is a step above the FirePro S7150's DirectX 12 (12_0), and its Vulkan 1.4 support is more current than Vulkan 1.2.170. The presence of display outputs (1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2) makes it usable in workstation environments with direct monitor connections, whereas the FirePro S7150 has no outputs and is strictly a compute or server card.

The AMD FirePro S7150 wins on physical footprint. Its single-slot design at 241 mm length makes it easier to fit into dense server chassis compared to the dual-slot, 267 mm Quadro M5000. The FirePro S7150 also offers FP16 compute at 7.537 TFLOPS, which the Quadro M5000 does not list. For workloads that specifically leverage FP16 operations, such as certain machine learning inference tasks, the FirePro S7150 has a measurable capability advantage.

The transistor density is slightly higher on the FirePro S7150 (13.7M / mm² versus 13.1M / mm²), though this does not translate into benchmark wins. The FirePro S7150's 32 ROPs are half of the Quadro M5000's 64 ROPs, which explains its significantly lower pixel rate. For rasterization-heavy professional workloads, the Quadro M5000 is clearly the stronger choice. For server deployments where space is at a premium and FP16 throughput is required, the FirePro S7150 has its place.