AMD Radeon HD 8870M vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison recorded in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M scores 11,771 points against 8,462 points for the AMD Radeon HD 8870M. That is a 39.1% advantage for the Quadro, a margin that places these two mobile parts in clearly different performance tiers despite both being 28 nm designs from the same era.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces this gap. The Quadro K5100M's average benchmark score of 10,043 sits between the AMD Radeon R9 M375 (10,070, only 0.3% ahead) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M (10,013, 0.3% behind). It edges the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M (9,959) by 0.8% and the NVIDIA Quadro 6000 (9,846) by 2%. The AMD Radeon HD 8870M, in contrast, averages 8,462, which places it in the company of the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8,458, 0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon 880M (8,436, 0.3% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427, 0.4% behind). Notably, the Intel Arc A380 scores 8,558, which is 1.1% ahead of the HD 8870M.

The raw OpenCL delta of 39.1% is the single most important number in this comparison. The Quadro K5100M does not merely win; it wins by a margin that no other neighboring rival in its own percentile band can match. The HD 8870M's closest competitor in the database, the MX330, is separated by just 0.1%, meaning the AMD part is right at the edge of its performance class, whereas the Quadro sits comfortably above its nearest rivals by a similar tiny margin but from a much higher absolute baseline.

Percentile data confirms the split. The Quadro K5100M ranks in the 48th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the HD 8870M sits in the 43rd percentile. That five-percentile gap corresponds to the substantial score difference observed in the head-to-head test. In short, the database records one clear winner in compute workloads, and it is the NVIDIA part by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The die measures 294 mm² and contains 3,540 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 12.0 million per mm². The AMD Radeon HD 8870M uses the Venus chip on GCN 1.0, also fabricated by TSMC on 28 nm, but the die is far smaller at 123 mm² with 1,500 million transistors, giving a slightly higher density of 12.2 million per mm².

The compute resources differ enormously. The Quadro K5100M packs 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines. The HD 8870M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These are not close numbers; the Quadro has 2.4 times the shaders and 3.2 times the TMUs. Pixel throughput tells the same story: 24.67 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 12.40 GPixel/s for the AMD. Texture rate is 98.69 GTexel/s versus 31.00 GTexel/s, a 3.2x gap. Floating point performance is 2.369 TFLOPS against 992.0 GFLOPS, meaning the Quadro delivers roughly 2.4 times the FP32 compute.

Memory configuration also diverges sharply. The Quadro carries 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8870M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s. The Quadro's memory bus is twice as wide and its bandwidth is 60% higher. Clock speeds are moderate on both parts, with the Quadro running at 771 MHz base and boost, while the AMD runs at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. The memory clocks differ more: 3.6 Gbps effective for the Quadro versus 4.5 Gbps effective for the AMD, but the narrower bus limits the AMD's realized bandwidth.

API support shows minor differences. Both support DirectX 12, but the Quadro is rated at 12 (11_0) while the AMD is rated at 12 (11_1). OpenGL is identical at 4.6. Vulkan support is 1.2.175 on the Quadro versus 1.2.170 on the AMD, a trivial revision difference. The Quadro uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and an MXM module slot, while the AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The Quadro has a rated TDP of 100 W; the AMD's TDP is not recorded in the database.

The generation lineage also differs. The Quadro belongs to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation, succeeding Quadro Fermi-M and succeeded by Quadro Maxwell-M. The AMD belongs to the Solar System (HD 8800M) generation, succeeding the London chip and succeeded by the Gem System. Both are marked as end-of-life products. Release dates are close: the AMD launched on 2013-03-31, the NVIDIA on 2013-07-22.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the recorded benchmark comparison?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M wins the only head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 11,771 against 8,462 for the AMD Radeon HD 8870M. The delta is 39.1% in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: How do these two compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Quadro K5100M's average score of 10,043 is within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon R9 M375 and 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M. The HD 8870M's average of 8,462 is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and 1.1% behind the Intel Arc A380.

Q: What are the main memory differences?

A: The Quadro K5100M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 8870M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro's bus is twice as wide.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro's DirectX rating is 12 (11_0) while the AMD's is 12 (11_1). Vulkan versions are 1.2.175 for NVIDIA and 1.2.170 for AMD.

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput?

A: The Quadro K5100M delivers 2.369 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 2.4 times the 992.0 GFLOPS of the HD 8870M. Shading units are 1,536 versus 640.

Q: How do the percentile rankings differ?

A: The Quadro K5100M ranks in the 48th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 8870M ranks in the 43rd percentile. This five-point gap reflects the substantial score difference between them.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M is the stronger GPU in every measured category. Its 39.1% lead in the OpenCL benchmark is backed by structural advantages in shading units, texture units, ROPs, memory bus width, memory capacity, and raw FP32 throughput. The Quadro also ranks five percentile points higher in the overall database distribution.

The AMD Radeon HD 8870M is not a weak part in absolute terms. Its 8,462 average score places it within 0.4% of the GeForce GTX 675MX and 0.3% of the Radeon 880M, meaning it performs on par with those mid-range mobile options. But against the Quadro, it loses by a margin large enough that no workload category in the recorded data would favor it.

For compute-heavy tasks, the choice is clear. The Quadro's 2.369 TFLOPS versus 992.0 GFLOPS means it will complete OpenCL workloads in less than half the time, all else being equal. The 8 GB frame buffer versus 2 GB also matters for larger datasets. The Quadro's 256-bit memory bus provides 115.2 GB/s, which is 60% higher than the AMD's 72.00 GB/s, reducing memory-bound stalls.

The AMD's advantages are minimal and mostly architectural. It has a slightly higher transistor density (12.2M per mm² versus 12.0M per mm²) and a marginally newer DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0). Neither translates into a benchmark win in the recorded data. The AMD also has a higher effective memory clock (4.5 Gbps versus 3.6 Gbps), but the narrower bus negates that advantage.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K5100M | AMD Radeon HD 8870M |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |

| Chip | GK104 | Venus |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 771 MHz | 725 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 771 MHz | 775 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 3.6 Gbps effective | 4.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB GDDR5 | 2 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 72.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1,536 | 640 |

| TMUs | 128 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 24.67 GPixel/s | 12.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 98.69 GTexel/s | 31.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.369 TFLOPS | 992.0 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 100 W | Not recorded |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2013-07-22 | 2013-03-31 |

| Generation | Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) | Solar System (HD 8800M) |

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M wins in every benchmark category present in the database. Its OpenCL score of 11,771 is 39.1% higher than the AMD's 8,462. The Quadro's 48th percentile ranking versus the AMD's 43rd percentile confirms that this advantage holds across the broader GPU landscape, not just in a single test.

The Quadro also wins on capacity and throughput metrics that matter for professional workloads. The 8 GB memory allocation is four times the AMD's 2 GB, which matters for large textures, deep learning inference batches, or multi-display frame buffers. The 115.2 GB/s bandwidth is 60% higher, reducing data transfer bottlenecks. The 2.369 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is more than double, accelerating any compute-heavy shader work.

The AMD Radeon HD 8870M wins on none of the recorded benchmarks. Its only specification advantages are the higher memory clock (4.5 Gbps versus 3.6 Gbps), the marginally newer DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0), and the slightly higher transistor density (12.2M versus 12.0M per mm²). These are technical distinctions without performance consequences in the measured data. The AMD also launched earlier, on 2013-03-31 versus 2013-07-22, and uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x16 interface rather than the Quadro's MXM-B slot.

For a user choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload. If the task requires maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, or high memory bandwidth, the Quadro K5100M is the only rational choice based on the recorded data. If the task is light enough that the AMD's 992.0 GFLOPS and 2 GB frame buffer suffice, then the AMD can handle it, but it offers no measured advantage over the Quadro in doing so. The Quadro's 100 W TDP is the only power figure recorded, and it comes without a specified power connector, whereas the AMD's power draw is not listed, so direct efficiency comparisons are not possible from the database.