AMD Radeon R9 M265X vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes one direct comparison between the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and the AMD Radeon R9 M265X. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M scores 11,771, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X scores 8,851. This produces a 33% advantage for the NVIDIA part, making it the clear winner in this head-to-head matchup. The delta is substantial and not marginal; a 33% performance gap in a compute-heavy workload is a decisive margin.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the Quadro K5100M also has a Geekbench Metal score of 8,315, which is not available for the Radeon R9 M265X. The average benchmark score for the Quadro K5100M sits at 10,043 across both recorded tests, whereas the Radeon R9 M265X has a single recorded average of 8,851. This means the NVIDIA part holds a composite lead of roughly 13.5% when comparing average scores across all tests in the database.

The win count confirms the direction: the Quadro K5100M wins 1 of the head-to-head benchmarks, while the Radeon R9 M265X wins 0. There is no recorded test where the AMD part takes the lead. The only available comparison point is the OpenCL workload, and the NVIDIA card dominates there.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M wins in the only direct comparison available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a 33% higher score. This indicates a strong advantage in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL, which often include rendering, physics simulation, and data-parallel workloads. The Quadro K5100M also holds a percentile ranking of 48 among all GPUs in the database, compared to the Radeon R9 M265X at percentile 44. While both sit near the middle of the pack, the NVIDIA part ranks slightly higher overall.

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X does not win any recorded benchmark in this comparison. Its single OpenCL score of 8,851 places it behind the Quadro K5100M by a wide margin. However, the AMD part does have a higher transistor density at 12.2 million transistors per square millimeter versus 12.0 million for NVIDIA, though this does not translate into a performance win in the recorded data. The R9 M265X also supports a slightly newer DirectX version, 12 (11_1) versus 12 (11_0) for the Quadro, which could be relevant for specific legacy DirectX 11.1 features, but no benchmark in the database tests this difference.

For users focused purely on compute throughput, the Quadro K5100M is the clear choice. For those who might need the newer DirectX feature set, the Radeon R9 M265X offers that specific capability, but the performance deficit in OpenCL is significant.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK104 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It integrates 3,540 million transistors on a die size of 294 square millimeters. The AMD Radeon R9 M265X uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Venus chip, also on TSMC's 28 nm node, but packs only 1,500 million transistors onto a 123 square millimeter die. The transistor density is nearly identical: 12.0 million per square millimeter for NVIDIA versus 12.2 million for AMD, but the NVIDIA chip is physically much larger, which allows for a far greater number of functional units.

The compute configuration differs sharply. The Quadro K5100M has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The Radeon R9 M265X has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a 2.4x advantage in shading units, a 3.2x advantage in TMUs, and a 2x advantage in ROPs for the NVIDIA card. These raw resource differences directly explain the large performance gap in the OpenCL test.

Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA. The Quadro K5100M runs at a base and boost clock of 771 MHz, while the Radeon R9 M265X has a base clock of 575 MHz and a boost clock of 625 MHz. Memory clocks follow the same pattern: the NVIDIA part uses 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) while AMD uses 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). Despite the lower memory clock, the Quadro K5100M has a wider 256-bit memory bus versus 128-bit for AMD, resulting in a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s, a 1.8x advantage.

Memory capacity also differs: the Quadro K5100M has 8 GB of GDDR5, while the Radeon R9 M265X has 2 GB. This makes the NVIDIA card far better suited for large datasets or high-resolution textures. The pixel rate for the Quadro is 24.67 GPixel/s versus 10.00 GPixel/s for AMD, and the texture rate is 98.69 GTexel/s versus 25.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance (FP32) is 2.369 TFLOPS versus 800.0 GFLOPS, a 2.96x gap.

The bus interface also differs: the Quadro K5100M uses MXM-B (3.0), typical for mobile workstations, while the Radeon R9 M265X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Power consumption data is available only for the NVIDIA part at 100 W TDP; no TDP is recorded for the AMD component. The Quadro is an MXM module with no power connectors, while the AMD card lists no slot width or power connector details.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M has an average benchmark score of 10,043, while the AMD Radeon R9 M265X averages 8,851. The NVIDIA card leads by about 13.5%.

Q: What is the performance difference in the OpenCL test?

A: The Quadro K5100M scores 11,771 versus 8,851 for the Radeon R9 M265X, a 33% advantage for NVIDIA.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K5100M has 8 GB GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R9 M265X has 2 GB GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Quadro K5100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Radeon R9 M265X supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, and their Vulkan versions are close: 1.2.175 for NVIDIA and 1.2.170 for AMD.

Q: What are the transistor counts on each chip?

A: The Quadro K5100M has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The Radeon R9 M265X has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Quadro K5100M ranks at percentile 48, while the Radeon R9 M265X ranks at percentile 44.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node is identical at 28 nm and both are manufactured by TSMC, but the die sizes diverge: 294 mm² for NVIDIA versus 123 mm² for AMD. Transistor counts are 3,540 million versus 1,500 million, with transistor densities of 12.0M/mm² versus 12.2M/mm².

Clock speeds show NVIDIA at 771 MHz for both base and boost, while AMD runs at 575 MHz base and 625 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA and 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for AMD. Memory capacity is 8 GB versus 2 GB, with bus widths of 256-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s.

Compute unit counts are heavily lopsided: 1,536 shading units versus 640, 128 TMUs versus 40, and 32 ROPs versus 16. Pixel rates are 24.67 GPixel/s versus 10.00 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 98.69 GTexel/s versus 25.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.369 TFLOPS versus 800.0 GFLOPS.

The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 100 W, while no TDP is recorded for AMD. The bus interface is MXM-B (3.0) for NVIDIA versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD. Display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for NVIDIA, with no data for AMD. Release dates differ: the Quadro K5100M launched on 2013-07-22, and the Radeon R9 M265X on 2014-03-20. The NVIDIA part is part of the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) generation, while AMD is from the Gem System (R9 M200) generation.

The Verdict

The data points overwhelmingly toward the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 33%, has a higher average score, a larger memory pool, more bandwidth, and nearly triple the FP32 throughput. Its 8 GB memory and 256-bit bus make it suitable for larger workloads, and its 100 W TDP is recorded, giving a clear power envelope.

The AMD Radeon R9 M265X does not win any recorded benchmark. Its advantages are limited to a slightly newer DirectX feature level (11_1 versus 11_0) and a marginally higher transistor density. These are narrow technical distinctions that do not show up in the measured performance data. Its lower memory capacity and bandwidth, combined with fewer compute units, place it firmly behind the NVIDIA part in every recorded test.

For users who need OpenCL compute for rendering, simulation, or data processing, the Quadro K5100M is the only rational choice based on these numbers. For those who specifically require DirectX 11.1 support and do not need the compute headroom, the Radeon R9 M265X could be considered, but the performance sacrifice is steep. The percentile rankings reflect this: 48 versus 44, a small but consistent edge for NVIDIA. The verdict is clear: the Quadro K5100M is the superior GPU in this pairing, with the only caveat being the AMD card's newer DirectX feature set, which the database does not benchmark.