GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 250 and NVIDIA Quadro 5000 represent two very different approaches to graphics hardware, separated by process technology, architectural philosophy, and target application. The benchmark data shows a narrow victory for the AMD part in the single available test, yet the underlying specifications reveal a stark contrast in how each card achieves its performance, making the choice between them highly dependent on the specific workload. The R7 250 is a product of a newer, more efficient era, while the Quadro 5000 is a professional-grade card from a previous generation with a significantly larger silicon footprint.

Where Each One Wins

The available benchmark data presents a clear, albeit limited, picture of performance. In the sole head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, the AMD Radeon R7 250 emerges as the winner. It scores 7557 points, which is 3.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro 5000’s score of 7289. This indicates that for general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, the R7 250 holds a slight edge in raw throughput as measured by this specific workload.

However, the context of each card’s position in the broader GPU landscape is telling. The R7 250 sits at the 41st percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro 5000 is just below it at the 40th percentile. This suggests that despite their different architectures and generations, they occupy a similar performance tier overall. The R7 250’s nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A310, which it beats by a razor-thin 0.1%, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, which beats it by 0.3%. This places the R7 250 in a competitive cluster of entry-level and older mid-range parts.

The Quadro 5000’s nearest rivals tell a similar story. It outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 by 0.9% and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile by 1.2%. Its performance is therefore comparable to those parts, reinforcing its position as a card that, while old, still delivers a baseline level of compute capability. The data does not support a claim that either card is universally superior; instead, the R7 250 wins the only measured comparison, but the two are statistically close, with a single test showing a difference of less than 4%.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is profound, rooted in their respective design goals and manufacturing eras. The AMD Radeon R7 250 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Cape Verde chip. It is fabricated on a modern 28 nm process at TSMC, which allows for a relatively compact 123 mm² die size. This chip houses 1,500 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.2M / mm². The architecture is designed for efficiency and balanced compute, with 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). It supports modern API features, including DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is based on the older Fermi architecture, using the GF100 chip. This is a much larger and older design, manufactured on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. The die size is a massive 529 mm², more than four times larger than the R7 250. It contains 3,100 million transistors, but its transistor density is significantly lower at 5.9M / mm², reflecting the less advanced manufacturing node. The Quadro 5000 has 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. Its feature set is more limited, supporting DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but it lacks Vulkan support entirely, which is a significant omission for modern applications.

The fundamental design philosophies are clear. The R7 250 leverages a newer process to pack a high number of shaders into a small, power-efficient package. The Quadro 5000, conversely, uses a massive, power-hungry die to deliver a different balance of resources, with more TMUs and ROPs but fewer shaders. The R7 250’s architecture is also more modern in terms of API support, while the Quadro 5000’s Fermi architecture is a legacy design focused on the professional workload of its time.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head benchmark result is the primary point of comparison for raw performance. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R7 250 scores 7557, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 scores 7289. This yields a delta of 3.7% in favor of the R7 250. This is a modest but real victory, suggesting that the R7 250’s newer architecture and higher shader count provide a measurable advantage in this compute-oriented test.

Interpreting this score requires looking at the rivals. The R7 250’s score is just 0.1% higher than the Intel Arc A310, indicating that its performance is essentially on par with that modern entry-level card. It also beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 by 1.1%, a notable result given the GTX 1650’s popularity. On the other side, the Quadro 5000’s score of 7289 is only 0.9% higher than the GeForce GTX 750 and 1.2% higher than the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile. This shows that while the Quadro 5000 wins against those specific parts, its performance is firmly in the same bracket.

The data shows that the R7 250 is not just winning on paper; it is winning against a broader field. Its 7557 score is higher than all four of its nearest rivals, whereas the Quadro 5000’s 7289 score is also higher than all four of its nearest rivals. The key difference is that the R7 250’s rivals are generally more modern parts, while the Quadro 5000’s rivals are older or more integrated solutions. The 3.7% delta between the two cards is the headline number, but the surrounding context suggests that the R7 250 has a slight edge in absolute compute performance.

Specification Differences

A direct comparison of specifications highlights the distinct hardware configurations of these two cards. The most obvious differences are in memory and power. The AMD Radeon R7 250 comes with 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000, on the other hand, is equipped with 2.5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a much wider 320-bit bus, yielding a significantly higher bandwidth of 120.0 GB/s. This is a major difference; the Quadro 5000 has over four times the memory bandwidth, which is critical for texture-heavy and large-dataset workloads.

The memory clocks also differ, with the R7 250 running at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) and the Quadro 5000 at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The higher effective speed of the GDDR5 memory, combined with the wider bus, gives the Quadro 5000 a massive bandwidth advantage. Power consumption is also a stark contrast. The R7 250 has a TDP of 55 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Quadro 5000 consumes 152 W, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and needs a 450 W PSU.

Physical dimensions and interface also vary. The R7 250 is a Single-slot card, 168 mm long, using a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The Quadro 5000 is a Dual-slot card, 248 mm long and 111 mm high, using the older PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. Display outputs are similar in count but different in type: the R7 250 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the Quadro 5000 offers 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort. Finally, the compute units themselves differ, with the R7 250 having 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the Quadro 5000 has 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 40 ROPs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 120.0 GB/s, compared to the AMD Radeon R7 250’s 28.80 GB/s. This is due to its wider 320-bit bus and faster GDDR5 memory.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 scores 7557, which is 3.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro 5000’s score of 7289, making it the winner in this specific test.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 has a 55 W TDP and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has a 152 W TDP, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU.

Q: Do both graphics cards support the same modern APIs?

A: No. The AMD Radeon R7 250 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support.

Q: Which GPU has a larger die and more transistors?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has a significantly larger die at 529 mm² and contains 3,100 million transistors. The AMD Radeon R7 250 has a die size of 123 mm² and has 1,500 million transistors.

Q: What is the memory size and type on each card?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 memory.