GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M and NVIDIA Quadro K5000 represent two very different eras of professional graphics hardware. The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M, which leads in every shared benchmark test, but the two cards serve different use cases based on their design targets and software support. The Radeon Pro 5500M is a modern mobile solution with RDNA 1.0 architecture, while the Quadro K5000 is a Kepler-based desktop workstation card from an older generation. Benchmark results indicate that the Radeon Pro 5500M dominates in compute and API-specific workloads, yet the Quadro K5000 retains relevance in legacy DirectX applications and specific professional environments. This analysis breaks down exactly where each card wins, answers common questions, and provides a verdict based solely on the recorded measurements.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins decisively in every single benchmark where both cards have recorded scores. Out of three head-to-head tests, the Radeon Pro 5500M takes all three victories. Its largest margin comes in the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 38235 against the Quadro K5000's 6324, a massive 504.6% advantage. This indicates that for Apple-centric workflows using Metal API, the Radeon Pro 5500M is overwhelmingly faster. Similarly, in Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 35134 versus 11169, a 214.6% lead, making it the clear choice for Vulkan-based applications. The OpenCL test shows a 172.3% advantage, with scores of 31088 and 11418 respectively.

The Quadro K5000 has no wins in the head-to-head benchmarks. However, the data shows it has a higher average score among its nearest rivals in the database. The Quadro K5000's average benchmark score is 9637, and its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, scores 9645, a delta of -0.1%. This means the Quadro K5000 is essentially tied with that rival. The Radeon Pro 5500M, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 11528, placing it 51st percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro K5000 sits at the 46th percentile. For legacy DirectX workloads, the Radeon Pro 5500M also shows strength in the Passmark suite, with scores of 96 in DirectX 9, 42 in DirectX 11, 36 in DirectX 10, and 29 in DirectX 12. The Quadro K5000 has no recorded Passmark scores, so no direct comparison exists, but the Radeon Pro 5500M's numbers suggest it handles older APIs well. The practical split is simple: the Radeon Pro 5500M wins all modern compute and graphics tests, while the Quadro K5000's only advantage is its legacy status and dual-slot desktop form factor, which are not benchmark metrics.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M has an average benchmark score of 11528, while the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 has an average of 9637. The Radeon Pro 5500M also ranks at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, compared to the Quadro K5000's 46th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the Radeon Pro 5500M in Metal performance?

A: In the Geekbench Metal test, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38235, which is 504.6% higher than the Quadro K5000's score of 6324. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any shared benchmark.

Q: Does the Quadro K5000 win any benchmark against the Radeon Pro 5500M?

A: No. The data records three head-to-head benchmarks: Geekbench Metal, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. The Radeon Pro 5500M wins all three, with the Quadro K5000 recording zero wins.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro K5000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 5500M offers double the capacity and higher bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M has a transistor density of 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter, while the Quadro K5000 has 12.0 million per square millimeter. This reflects the 7 nm process node of the Radeon Pro 5500M versus the 28 nm node of the Quadro K5000.

Q: What are the DirectX support levels?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Quadro K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The Radeon Pro 5500M also has a Vulkan version of 1.4, compared to the Quadro K5000's Vulkan 1.2.175.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three recorded head-to-head benchmarks show a consistent and overwhelming pattern of dominance by the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M. The largest gap is in Geekbench Metal. The Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38235, while the Quadro K5000 scores 6324. This 504.6% difference means the Radeon Pro 5500M is more than six times faster in this test. Metal is the primary graphics API on Apple platforms, and the Radeon Pro 5500M's generation is explicitly tied to Mac systems, as indicated by its "Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile)" generation name. The Quadro K5000, from 2012, was not designed for Metal, and its score reflects that.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 35134 versus 11169 for the Quadro K5000, a 214.6% lead. Vulkan is a cross-platform API, and the Radeon Pro 5500M's newer architecture handles it far more efficiently. The Quadro K5000's Vulkan support is limited to version 1.2.175, while the Radeon Pro 5500M supports Vulkan 1.4. This version gap likely contributes to the performance difference.

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the smallest margin of the three, but it is still substantial. The Radeon Pro 5500M scores 31088, and the Quadro K5000 scores 11418, a 172.3% advantage. OpenCL is a general-purpose compute API, and the Radeon Pro 5500M's FP32 performance of 4.454 TFLOPS is more than double the Quadro K5000's 2.169 TFLOPS. The texture rate also favors the Radeon Pro 5500M at 139.2 GTexel/s versus 90.37 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s versus 22.59 GPixel/s. These raw throughput numbers explain the benchmark outcomes.

The Radeon Pro 5500M also has Passmark scores that the Quadro K5000 lacks entirely. These include DirectX 9 at 96, DirectX 11 at 42, DirectX 10 at 36, DirectX 12 at 29, G2D at 648, G3D at 6732, and GPU compute at 3240. While no head-to-head comparison exists for these tests, the Radeon Pro 5500M's complete benchmark profile shows it is functional across multiple API generations, whereas the Quadro K5000 only has Geekbench results recorded.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is memory capacity and type. The Radeon Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6, while the Quadro K5000 has 4 GB of GDDR5. The bus widths differ as well: 128-bit for the Radeon Pro 5500M versus 256-bit for the Quadro K5000. Despite the narrower bus, the Radeon Pro 5500M achieves higher bandwidth at 192.0 GB/s, compared to 172.8 GB/s for the Quadro K5000, due to the faster GDDR6 memory clocked at 12 Gbps effective versus 5.4 Gbps effective.

Clock speeds are another clear differentiator. The Radeon Pro 5500M has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1450 MHz. The Quadro K5000 has a fixed clock of 706 MHz for both base and boost. This clock advantage contributes to the Radeon Pro 5500M's higher compute rates. The FP32 performance is 4.454 TFLOPS for the Radeon Pro 5500M versus 2.169 TFLOPS for the Quadro K5000. The Radeon Pro 5500M also supports FP16 at 8.909 TFLOPS, while the Quadro K5000 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power consumption and physical design differ significantly. The Radeon Pro 5500M has a TDP of 85 W and requires no power connectors, indicating a mobile design. The Quadro K5000 has a TDP of 122 W, uses a single 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300 W. The Quadro K5000 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the Radeon Pro 5500M has no recorded dimensions or slot width, consistent with a portable device.

The bus interface also differs. The Radeon Pro 5500M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Quadro K5000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16. The Radeon Pro 5500M's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," whereas the Quadro K5000 has fixed outputs: 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The Radeon Pro 5500M was released on 2019-11-12, while the Quadro K5000 was released on 2012-08-16. The Quadro K5000 has a recorded launch MSRP of 2,499 USD.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon Pro 5500M is built on the Navi 14 chip using RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 6,400 million transistors on a die size of 158 mm², giving a transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter. The Quadro K5000 uses the GK104 chip with Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,540 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², giving a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro 5500M is nearly twice as dense in terms of transistor packing.

Both cards have 1536 shading units and 32 ROPs, but the Radeon Pro 5500M has 96 texture mapping units (TMUs) versus 128 for the Quadro K5000. This means the Quadro K5000 has more TMUs, yet its texture rate is lower at 90.37 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s for the Radeon Pro 5500M, due to the clock speed difference. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores, so ray tracing and tensor acceleration are not differentiators here.

The Radeon Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon Pro 5500M has a higher memory clock at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, versus 1350 MHz with 5.4 Gbps effective for the Quadro K5000. The Radeon Pro 5500M's generation is specifically labeled for Mac (Navi Mobile), while the Quadro K5000 belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation. The Quadro K5000 has a predecessor (Quadro Fermi) and a successor (Quadro Maxwell), while the Radeon Pro 5500M has no recorded predecessor or successor.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is the superior card in every measured performance category. It wins all three head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 172.3% to 504.6%. Its average benchmark score is 11528, placing it at the 51st percentile, while the Quadro K5000 sits at 9637 and the 46th percentile. The Radeon Pro 5500M offers more memory (8 GB versus 4 GB), higher bandwidth (192.0 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s), higher clocks (1450 MHz boost versus 706 MHz), and more than double the FP32 compute (4.454 TFLOPS versus 2.169 TFLOPS). It is also more power-efficient at 85 W versus 122 W.

For users working with Metal, Vulkan, or OpenCL workloads, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the only reasonable choice based on the recorded data. Its 504.6% lead in Metal makes it essential for Apple ecosystem users. Its Vulkan and OpenCL advantages are similarly decisive. The Radeon Pro 5500M also has full Passmark coverage across DirectX 9 through 12, indicating broad API compatibility.

The Quadro K5000 does have one distinction: it is a desktop dual-slot card with fixed display outputs (2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2), while the Radeon Pro 5500M is a mobile solution. For a workstation requiring a specific desktop form factor with DVI outputs, the Quadro K5000 might be the only physical fit. However, there is no benchmark evidence that the Quadro K5000 outperforms the Radeon Pro 5500M in any test. Its 4 GB memory and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth are lower, and its compute rates are less than half. The Quadro K5000's launch MSRP was 2,499 USD, but no such price is recorded for the Radeon Pro 5500M.

Users should pick the Radeon Pro 5500M for any modern workload: Metal, Vulkan, OpenCL, DirectX, or general compute. The Quadro K5000 should only be considered if the specific hardware requirements are mandatory, such as a dual-slot desktop card with DVI output, or if the software environment is locked to its older driver and API versions. In all performance-based comparisons, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the clear winner, and the data shows no scenario where the Quadro K5000 comes out ahead.