AMD Radeon R5 Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro P1000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two GPUs into clearly different roles. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins nothing in the head-to-head benchmark set, while the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 wins both recorded tests. That is a decisive sweep, but the margin and the nature of the tests matter more than the simple count.

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is an integrated graphics processor, part of the Kaveri era GCN 2.0 generation. Its entire memory subsystem is "System Shared," meaning it borrows from the host system's RAM. The bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent," which makes its performance heavily reliant on the surrounding platform. In the database, its average benchmark score sits at 3883, placing it in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs. That percentile rank is modest, but it is actually higher than the Quadro P1000's 20th percentile, which is a nuance worth exploring.

The NVIDIA Quadro P1000, by contrast, is a discrete single-slot card built on the Pascal architecture with a 14 nm process node from Samsung. It has its own 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. It also has explicit clock speeds: a base of 1266 MHz and a boost of 1480 MHz. The P1000's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 3163, which is lower than the AMD part's average, but that is because the P1000 has many more benchmark entries, including several low-scoring DirectX tests that drag down the average.

The key insight is that the P1000 wins in raw compute and graphics APIs, while the R5's only advantage in the database is its higher aggregate percentile ranking. That percentile difference is likely due to the fact that the R5 is an IGP with fewer recorded benchmark submissions, and its scores cluster around one or two tests. The P1000, with nine recorded benchmarks, has a wider spread, including some very low DirectX 12 and DirectX 10 scores that pull its average down.

For use-case split: if you need a dedicated workstation card with consistent driver support and dedicated VRAM, the P1000 is the clear choice. If you are comparing only the two Geekbench scores, the P1000 dominates. But if you look at the overall percentile, the R5 sits higher relative to the entire GPU universe, meaning it is less embarrassing for an integrated part than the P1000's percentile is for a discrete card.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 wins both head-to-head benchmarks. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 13584 against the R5's 5183, a delta of -61.8% from the R5's perspective. In Geekbench Vulkan, the P1000 scores 7739 against 2582, a delta of -66.6%. Those are massive margins, roughly 2.6x and 3.0x respectively.

Who should pick the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics? Only someone who is already committed to an older Kaveri platform and cannot add a discrete GPU. Its 15 W TDP and IGP slot width mean it consumes no extra power and requires no additional cooling. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, which is respectable for an integrated part from 2014. Its nearest rivals in the database, such as the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (avg score 3898, delta -0.4%) and the GeForce MX110 (avg score 3834, delta 1.3%), show that it sits in a narrow performance band around 3800-3900 average score.

Who should pick the NVIDIA Quadro P1000? Anyone needing a discrete, single-slot card with dedicated memory and a modern feature set. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which is a newer Vulkan version than the R5. It has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the R5's display outputs are motherboard dependent. The P1000 also has a fixed 47 W TDP and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Arc Pro B60 (avg score 3182, delta -0.6%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (avg score 3210, delta -1.5%), indicating it sits in a similar performance band to those cards.

The verdict is simple: the P1000 is the superior performer in every recorded head-to-head test. The R5 is only relevant as a legacy integrated solution.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. Both are comprehensive compute workloads that stress the GPU's architecture, memory subsystem, and driver efficiency.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 achieves a score of 13584. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5183. The delta is -61.8%, meaning the R5 is roughly 62% slower than the P1000. To put that in perspective, the P1000 is about 2.62 times faster. This is the smaller of the two margins, but still a decisive victory. The P1000's 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, combined with its 1.894 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, overwhelm the R5's 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs, which deliver only 388.1 GFLOPS of FP32.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens. The P1000 scores 7739, while the R5 scores 2582. The delta is -66.6%, meaning the R5 is about two-thirds slower. The P1000 is roughly 3.0 times faster in this test. Vulkan tends to favor architectures with lower overhead and better driver optimization. The Pascal architecture in the P1000 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GCN 2.0 architecture in the R5 tops out at Vulkan 1.2.170. That version gap likely contributes to the larger margin.

Beyond the head-to-head, the P1000 has additional benchmark data that the R5 lacks. The P1000 records a Passmark G3D score of 4512, a G2D score of 589, and a GPU compute score of 1891. It also has DirectX-specific scores: 79 for DirectX 9, 21 for DirectX 10, 31 for DirectX 11, and 19 for DirectX 12. These scores are not comparable to the R5 because the R5 has no Passmark entries in the database. However, they show that the P1000's performance is not uniform across APIs; it peaks in older DirectX 9 and drops sharply in newer DirectX 12, which is typical for a Pascal-era card.

The R5's only benchmarks are the two Geekbench tests. Its average score of 3883 is computed from those, while the P1000's average of 3163 is computed from nine tests, several of which are very low (e.g., 19 in DirectX 12). This is why the R5 has a higher percentile rank (23rd vs 20th) despite losing both head-to-head tests.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has an average benchmark score of 3883, while the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 has an average of 3163. However, the P1000 has nine recorded benchmarks, including several low DirectX scores, while the R5 only has two Geekbench entries.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two in a head-to-head test?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the P1000 scores 7739 against the R5's 2582, a delta of -66.6%. The P1000 is roughly three times faster in that test.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics support modern APIs?

A: Yes, it supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the P1000 has a newer Vulkan version.

Q: How much dedicated memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses system shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM. The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size difference?

A: The R5 has 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die, fabricated on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The P1000 has 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, fabricated on a 14 nm process at Samsung. The P1000 has a significantly higher transistor density: 25.0M per mm² versus 9.8M per mm².

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 has a pixel rate of 47.36 GPixel/s, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has a pixel rate of 3.032 GPixel/s. The P1000 is over 15 times faster in pixel throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is based on GCN 2.0, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The chip is called "Spectre SL" and belongs to the Kaveri IGP generation. It packs 2,410 million transistors into a 245 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 9.8M per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 is based on Pascal, built on a 14 nm process at Samsung. The chip is GP107, and it packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, yielding a density of 25.0M per mm². The P1000's die is nearly half the size but holds over a billion more transistors.

The compute resources differ massively. The R5 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and only 4 ROPs. The P1000 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That is 2.5 times the shading units, 2.5 times the TMUs, and 8 times the ROPs. The FP32 compute figures reflect this: the R5 delivers 388.1 GFLOPS, while the P1000 delivers 1.894 TFLOPS. The P1000 also has a recorded FP16 rate of 29.60 GFLOPS (at a 1:64 ratio), while the R5 has no FP16 entry.

Memory architecture is completely different. The R5 uses system shared memory, meaning its bus width, type, and bandwidth are all dependent on the host system. The P1000 has dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with a fixed bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s. The P1000 also has explicit memory clocks: 1253 MHz, with 5 Gbps effective. The R5 has no memory clock listed.

Clock behavior also differs. The R5 has no base or boost clock recorded; its performance is tied to the system's memory and IGP implementation. The P1000 has a base clock of 1266 MHz and a boost clock of 1480 MHz. The P1000's pixel rate is 47.36 GPixel/s and texture rate is 59.20 GTexel/s, while the R5's are 3.032 GPixel/s and 12.13 GTexel/s respectively.

Physical and power characteristics diverge sharply. The R5 is an IGP with a 15 W TDP and no slot width, power connectors, or bus interface beyond "IGP." The P1000 is a single-slot card measuring 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with a 47 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The P1000 connects via PCIe 3.0 x16 and provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The R5's display outputs are motherboard dependent.

API support shows a generational gap. The R5 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The P1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference (12_0 vs 12_1) and the Vulkan version difference (1.2.170 vs 1.4) are the only API-related differentiators, as both support OpenGL 4.6.

Production status and release dates also differ. The R5 was released on 2014-09-16 and is end-of-life, with a predecessor of TeraScale 3 IGP and successor of GCN 3.0 IGP. The P1000 was released on 2017-02-06 and is also end-of-life, with a predecessor of Quadro Maxwell and successor of Quadro Volta. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.