AMD Radeon R7 M370 vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 and AMD Radeon R7 M370 are two end-of-life graphics cards from different eras, targeting different segments. The Quadro 5000 is a 2011 professional workstation card based on NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture, while the R7 M370 is a 2015 mobile/entry-level part using AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture. The data shows a close contest in raw compute benchmarks, but the architectural and feature differences are substantial.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has an average benchmark score of 7289, while the AMD Radeon R7 M370 scores 6764. The Quadro 5000 sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the R7 M370’s 38th percentile.

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

A: The Quadro 5000 scores 7289 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the R7 M370’s 7063 by 3.2%. This is the only head-to-head benchmark available, and the Quadro 5000 wins it.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each card, and how close are they?

A: The Quadro 5000’s closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, which scores 7222 (0.9% behind). The R7 M370’s closest rival is the AMD FirePro M5100, which scores 6830 (1% ahead of the R7 M370).

Q: Does the Radeon R7 M370 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the R7 M370 has a Vulkan API version of 1.2.170. The Quadro 5000 does not list a Vulkan version in the data, and its DirectX support is limited to 12 (11_0), while the R7 M370 supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: What is the power draw of the Quadro 5000?

A: The Quadro 5000 has a TDP of 152 W, requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, and needs a suggested PSU of 450 W. The R7 M370 does not list a TDP, power connector, or suggested PSU in the data.

Q: When were these cards released?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 was released on February 22, 2011, with a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD. The AMD Radeon R7 M370 was released on May 4, 2015, and has no launch MSRP listed.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Quadro 5000 uses NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture with the GF100 chip, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,100 million transistors on a die size of 529 mm², giving it a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². In contrast, the R7 M370 uses AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture with the Litho chip, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It has 950 million transistors on a much smaller die of 77 mm², resulting in a higher transistor density of 12.3M per mm².

The memory subsystems differ markedly. The Quadro 5000 has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 120.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M370 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 57.60 GB/s. The Quadro 5000’s memory clock is 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective), while the R7 M370 runs at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective), but the wider bus gives the NVIDIA card a decisive bandwidth advantage.

Compute resources are surprisingly close. The Quadro 5000 has 352 shading units, 44 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 40 raster operation units (ROPs). The R7 M370 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. The FP32 performance is nearly identical: 722.3 GFLOPS for the Quadro 5000 versus 737.3 GFLOPS for the R7 M370. Pixel rate favors the Quadro 5000 at 11.29 GPixel/s versus 7.680 GPixel/s, while texture rate slightly favors the R7 M370 at 23.04 GTexel/s versus 22.57 GTexel/s.

The Quadro 5000 uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while the R7 M370 uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The NVIDIA card is a dual-slot design with 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort outputs, measuring 248 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The R7 M370 has no listed dimensions, slot width, or display outputs. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the R7 M370 has a Vulkan version (1.2.170) while the Quadro 5000 does not.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is the stronger performer, winning the only direct head-to-head test. It beats the R7 M370 by 3.2% in Geekbench OpenCL (7289 vs 7063) and has a higher average benchmark score (7289 vs 6764) and a better percentile ranking (40th vs 38th).

However, the choice depends on use case. The Quadro 5000 is a professional workstation card from 2011 with a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD, featuring a wide 320-bit memory bus and 2.5 GB of VRAM. It is end-of-life, as is the R7 M370. The R7 M370, while slower in the single available benchmark, offers Vulkan support and a higher DirectX version (12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)), making it more modern in API compatibility. It also has a slightly higher FP32 throughput (737.3 GFLOPS vs 722.3 GFLOPS).

For raw compute performance and memory bandwidth, the Quadro 5000 is the clear choice. For users requiring Vulkan or newer API features, the R7 M370 has the edge. The Quadro 5000’s nearest rivals (GTX 750 at 0.9% behind) are all within 1.7% of its score, indicating it competes with mid-range consumer cards from later generations. The R7 M370’s rivals span a wider range, from the FirePro M5100 (1% ahead) to the GTX 675M (2.6% ahead), showing it sits slightly lower in the performance hierarchy.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 5000 | AMD Radeon R7 M370 |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | GCN 1.0 |

| Chip | GF100 | Litho |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 2.5 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 320 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 120.0 GB/s | 57.60 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 750 MHz / 3 Gbps effective | 900 MHz / 3.6 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 352 | 384 |

| TMUs | 44 | 24 |

| ROPs | 40 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.29 GPixel/s | 7.680 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.57 GTexel/s | 23.04 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 722.3 GFLOPS | 737.3 GFLOPS |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 875 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 960 MHz |

| TDP | 152 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Not listed |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | Not listed |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | Not listed |

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

| Vulkan | Not listed | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 248 mm x 111 mm | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2011-02-22 | 2015-05-04 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,499 USD | Not listed |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 scores 7289, while the AMD Radeon R7 M370 scores 7063. This gives the Quadro 5000 a 3.2% advantage. This is a narrow margin, suggesting that the two cards have similar raw compute capability despite their architectural differences.

The Quadro 5000 also wins on average benchmark score: 7289 versus 6764 for the R7 M370. This 7.8% gap (calculated from the provided scores) is larger than the head-to-head delta, partly because the R7 M370’s average is dragged down by its additional Geekbench Vulkan score of 6465, which is lower than its OpenCL result. The Quadro 5000 has no Vulkan benchmark listed.

Looking at the nearest rivals, the Quadro 5000’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 with a score of 7222 (0.9% behind). The R7 M370’s closest rival is the AMD FirePro M5100 at 6830, which is 1% ahead. This means the Quadro 5000 outperforms its nearest rival, while the R7 M370 slightly underperforms its nearest rival. The R7 M370 also trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946) by 2.6% and beats the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6612) by 2.3%. The Quadro 5000 beats all four of its listed rivals, with margins ranging from 0.9% to 1.7%.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Quadro 5000 Wins:

• OpenCL compute: Wins the head-to-head by 3.2% (7289 vs 7063).
• Average benchmark score: 7289 vs 6764, a 7.8% advantage.
• Memory bandwidth: 120.0 GB/s vs 57.60 GB/s — more than double.
• Pixel rate: 11.29 GPixel/s vs 7.680 GPixel/s, a 47% advantage.
• ROPs: 40 vs 8, indicating better fill-rate-bound performance.
• Memory bus width: 320-bit vs 128-bit.
• VRAM capacity: 2.5 GB vs 2 GB.
• Professional workstation features: Dual-slot design, 1x 6-pin connector, 450 W suggested PSU, display outputs.

AMD Radeon R7 M370 Wins:

• FP32 throughput: 737.3 GFLOPS vs 722.3 GFLOPS, a marginal 2% advantage.
• Texture rate: 23.04 GTexel/s vs 22.57 GTexel/s.
• Shading units: 384 vs 352.
• API support: Vulkan 1.2.170 (not available on Quadro 5000) and DirectX 12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0).
• Memory clock: 900 MHz vs 750 MHz (effective 3.6 Gbps vs 3 Gbps).
• Process node: 28 nm vs 40 nm, leading to higher transistor density (12.3M / mm² vs 5.9M / mm²).
• Base and boost clocks: Listed at 875 MHz and 960 MHz; the Quadro 5000 has no base or boost clock listed.

The Quadro 5000 is the pick for memory-bandwidth-heavy workloads and professional applications, given its 320-bit bus and dual-slot workstation design. The R7 M370 is better suited for tasks requiring modern API features like Vulkan, and it delivers slightly higher raw FP32 and texture throughput. The data shows the Quadro 5000 as the overall winner in compute benchmarks, but the R7 M370 is a more modern, feature-complete part for its era.