AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT vs NVIDIA Quadro K5200 Comparison

# NVIDIA Quadro K5200 vs AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT

The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT is the definitive winner in this comparison, dominating the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 across every shared benchmark with massive margins. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 59,467 versus the Quadro K5200's 19,024, a 68% advantage, and leads in Geekbench Vulkan with 56,593 versus 20,180, a 64.3% gap. The Quadro K5200's only statistical edge is its average benchmark score of 19,602 versus 18,685, but that figure includes the Radeon's additional tests, including a Passmark G3D score of 12,547 and a Metal score of 51,272, which the Quadro cannot match. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT is the pick for any modern workload requiring OpenCL, Vulkan, or Metal performance; the Quadro K5200 remains relevant only for legacy Kepler-era software compatibility.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 by a wide margin in every directly comparable benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 59,467, which is 3.1 times higher than the Quadro K5200's 19,024. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 56,593, a 2.8 times improvement over the Quadro K5200's 20,180. The Quadro K5200 has zero wins in head-to-head testing; the Radeon Pro 5700 XT has two.

For users choosing between these two, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT is the clear choice for any OpenCL compute, Vulkan rendering, or Metal-based workload. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth doubles the Quadro K5200's 8 GB GDDR5 at 192.3 GB/s. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT also delivers 7.675 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 3.553 TFLOPS, and its 95.94 GPixel/s pixel rate and 239.8 GTexel/s texture rate dwarf the Quadro K5200's 37.01 GPixel/s and 148.0 GTexel/s.

The Quadro K5200 should only be considered if the user requires its specific display outputs (2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2) or needs a dual-slot PCIe 3.0 card with a 6-pin power connector — the Radeon Pro 5700 XT has no display outputs and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP). The Quadro K5200 also has a higher percentile ranking at 64 versus 63, but this marginal difference does not compensate for the 68% deficit in OpenCL and 64.3% deficit in Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA Quadro K5200 is built on the Kepler architecture, specifically the GK110B chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, built on a 7 nm process also at TSMC. It packs 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 41.0 million per mm² — more than three times the density of the Kepler chip.

The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro K5200 has 2,304 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. While the Quadro has more TMUs, the Radeon's higher clocks — 1,243 MHz base and 1,499 MHz boost versus 667 MHz base and 771 MHz boost — completely overshadow that count. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT also supports FP16 compute at 15.35 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the Quadro K5200 has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory architecture splits them further. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus at 12 Gbps effective, producing 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro K5200 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus but at 6 Gbps effective, yielding 192.3 GB/s — exactly half the bandwidth. The Radeon connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

API support also differs: the Radeon Pro 5700 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K5200 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has a TDP of 130 W with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 300 W; the Quadro K5200 has a 150 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT is vastly superior, scoring 59,467 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 19,024 for the NVIDIA Quadro K5200, a 68% advantage.

Q: Can the Radeon Pro 5700 XT output to displays?

A: No. The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has no display outputs and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor). The Quadro K5200 offers 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro K5200 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The Radeon Pro 5700 XT has a lower TDP of 130 W compared to the Quadro K5200's 150 W, and it requires no power connectors while the Quadro needs a 6-pin connector. The Radeon also suggests a 300 W PSU versus 450 W for the Quadro.

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The Quadro K5200 was released on July 21, 2014, while the Radeon Pro 5700 XT came out on August 3, 2020 — a six-year gap that explains the architectural leap.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The Radeon Pro 5700 XT leads with a Geekbench Vulkan score of 56,593 versus 20,180 for the Quadro K5200, a 64.3% margin. The Radeon also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.175 for the Quadro.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K5200 | AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 667 MHz | 1,243 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 771 MHz | 1,499 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Effective Speed | 6 Gbps | 12 Gbps |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.3 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2,304 | 2,560 |

| TMUs | 192 | 160 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 37.01 GPixel/s | 95.94 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 148.0 GTexel/s | 239.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.553 TFLOPS | 7.675 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 15.35 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2014-07-21 | 2020-08-03 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two shared benchmarks, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT wins both by crushing margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 59,467 against the Quadro K5200's 19,024, a deltaPct of -68 (meaning the Quadro is 68% slower). In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT scores 56,593 versus 20,180, a deltaPct of -64.3. These are not close contests; the Radeon Pro 5700 XT delivers roughly three times the compute throughput in both APIs.

The Quadro K5200's average benchmark score of 19,602 is higher than the Radeon Pro 5700 XT's 18,685, but this is misleading. The Radeon's average includes 10 benchmark results, including a Passmark G3D score of 12,547, a Passmark GPU Compute score of 5,787, and a Geekbench Metal score of 51,272. The Quadro has only two benchmark results, both of which are far lower than the Radeon's corresponding scores. The Quadro's percentile ranking of 64 versus 63 for the Radeon is a statistical artifact of the different benchmark sets, not a genuine performance advantage.

The Radeon Pro 5700 XT also demonstrates strong DirectX performance in its Passmark results: DirectX 9 at 153, DirectX 10 at 76, DirectX 11 at 85, and DirectX 12 at 59. Its 2D graphics score of 810 further indicates solid general-purpose rendering capability. The Quadro K5200 has no comparable Passmark data in the fact pack.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT wins in every measurable performance category. For OpenCL compute workloads, it is 68% faster. For Vulkan rendering, it is 64.3% faster. Its 16 GB memory capacity and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets that would exceed the Quadro K5200's 8 GB frame buffer. Its FP32 throughput of 7.675 TFLOPS and FP16 capability of 15.35 TFLOPS position it for modern compute tasks, while its 7 nm process and 130 W TDP make it more efficient despite delivering over twice the raw performance.

The NVIDIA Quadro K5200's only advantages are practical, not performance-based. It offers display outputs (2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2), making it usable as a standalone graphics output card. It is a dual-slot card with a 6-pin connector, which may fit certain workstation chassis designs. Its PCIe 3.0 interface is more compatible with older systems, and its 2014 release date means it may have legacy driver support for older Kepler-era applications. Its higher percentile ranking (64 vs 63) suggests that, among all GPUs in the database, it sits marginally higher in the distribution — but this does not translate into any benchmark win against the Radeon Pro 5700 XT.

For any user prioritizing compute performance, memory capacity, or modern API support, the Radeon Pro 5700 XT is the only rational choice. The Quadro K5200's single meaningful niche is as a display-output-capable card for legacy systems that cannot use the output-less Radeon Pro 5700 XT.