AMD Radeon R9 M375X vs NVIDIA Quadro K5000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile and workstation oriented GPUs. The NVIDIA Quadro K5000 wins both head-to-head tests in the database, with no benchmark victories recorded for the AMD Radeon R9 M375X. The K5000 leads by 38% in Geekbench OpenCL and by 33.3% in Geekbench Vulkan, making it the stronger compute part across both APIs tested.

The Quadro K5000 also holds a higher overall position in the database rankings. Its average benchmark score of 9637 places it at the 46th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon R9 M375X sits at the 43rd percentile with an average score of 8325. That three percentile gap reflects a meaningful performance tier difference, even though both cards occupy the mid-range of the database.

For use-case segmentation, the K5000 is the clear choice for OpenCL workloads. Its score of 11418 in Geekbench OpenCL is the highest single result recorded for either card, and it outperforms the R9 M375X by a substantial margin. Vulkan compute follows the same pattern: the K5000 scores 11169 versus 8377 for the AMD part. The R9 M375X does not have a Geekbench Metal result in the database, while the K5000 records 6324 in that test, so the NVIDIA card also covers Metal-based applications where the AMD card has no recorded measurement.

The R9 M375X, despite losing both direct comparisons, is not without merit in context. Its average score of 8325 sits within 0.7% of the NVIDIA Quadro K1200, its closest rival in the database, and it trails the GeForce GTX 675MX by only 1.2%. The K5000, by contrast, is essentially tied with the GeForce GTX 960M (delta of -0.1%) and the Radeon Pro WX 2100 (delta of -0.2%). So the R9 M375X is competitive with its immediate peers, but the K5000 operates in a higher performance band entirely.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA Quadro K5000 uses the GK104 chip based on the Kepler architecture, belonging to the Quadro Kepler (Kx000) generation. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0, part of the Gem System (R9 M300) generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, and their transistor densities are nearly identical: 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter for the NVIDIA chip versus 12.2 million for the AMD chip. The similarity ends there, as the actual transistor counts and die sizes diverge sharply.

The K5000 packs 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, while the R9 M375X contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. This makes the GK104 more than twice as large in both transistor count and die area. The larger chip budget translates directly into more execution resources. The K5000 has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R9 M375X has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA card carries 2.4 times the shading units and 3.2 times the TMUs.

Memory architecture also differs substantially. The K5000 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M375X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s. That is a 140% bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA card. Clock behavior is inverted: the AMD part runs at a base clock of 925 MHz with a boost up to 1015 MHz, while the K5000 operates at a flat 706 MHz with no boost. The AMD card also has a higher memory clock at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) versus 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card, but the wider bus on the K5000 overcomes this.

API support shows minor differences. Both cards support DirectX 12, but the K5000 reports 12 (11_0) while the R9 M375X reports 12 (11_1). OpenGL 4.6 is supported by both. Vulkan versions are close: 1.2.175 for the NVIDIA card and 1.2.170 for the AMD card. The bus interface differs as well, with the K5000 using PCIe 2.0 x16 and the R9 M375X using PCIe 3.0 x16, though this does not appear to hinder the older NVIDIA part in the recorded benchmarks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the largest gap between the two cards. The NVIDIA Quadro K5000 scores 11418, while the AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8273. That is a 38% delta in favor of the K5000. The margin is substantial enough to place these cards in different performance classes for compute workloads. The K5000's 2.169 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, combined with its 172.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, provides the raw resources behind this result. The R9 M375X delivers 1,299.2 GFLOPS (which converts to 1.2992 TFLOPS) and 72.00 GB/s, less than half the memory bandwidth of its rival.

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap slightly but still favors the K5000 decisively. The NVIDIA card scores 11169 versus 8377 for the AMD card, a 33.3% delta. Vulkan results are often more sensitive to driver optimization and API overhead than raw compute throughput, so the fact that the K5000 maintains a similar advantage in both APIs suggests the performance difference is architectural rather than driver-related. The R9 M375X's Vulkan score of 8377 is actually slightly higher than its OpenCL score of 8273, while the K5000 scores marginally lower in Vulkan than OpenCL. This indicates the AMD card scales slightly better into Vulkan relative to its own OpenCL baseline, but the absolute gap to the K5000 remains large.

The K5000 also has a Geekbench Metal score of 6324 in the database, a test that the R9 M375X does not appear in. While this cannot be directly compared, it expands the NVIDIA card's coverage across Apple-oriented compute APIs. The average benchmark score for the K5000 is 9637, which is 15.8% higher than the R9 M375X's average of 8325. The percentile rankings confirm the separation: 46th versus 43rd percentile among all GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5000 has an average benchmark score of 9637, while the AMD Radeon R9 M375X averages 8325. The K5000 sits at the 46th percentile of all GPUs, three points above the R9 M375X at the 43rd percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL compute?

A: The K5000 leads by 38% in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 11418 versus 8273 for the R9 M375X. This is the largest margin recorded in the head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: Does the Radeon R9 M375X win any benchmark comparison?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the R9 M375X loses both. Its win count is zero against the K5000's two.

Q: How does the R9 M375X compare to its own closest rivals?

A: The R9 M375X is 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 in average score, but trails the GeForce GTX 675MX by 1.2%, the Radeon 880M by 1.3%, and the GeForce MX330 by 1.6%. Its average of 8325 places it just below several modern mobile parts.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The K5000 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The R9 M375X uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. Their transistor densities are nearly identical at 12.0 million per square millimeter for the K5000 and 12.2 million for the R9 M375X, despite very different die sizes.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ in the database records.

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K5000 | AMD Radeon R9 M375X |

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

| Chip | GK104 | Tropo |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | Quadro Kepler (Kx000) | Gem System (R9 M300) |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 706 MHz | 925 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 706 MHz | 1015 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz, 5.4 Gbps effective | 1125 MHz, 4.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 72.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 640 |

| TMUs | 128 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 22.59 GPixel/s | 16.24 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 90.37 GTexel/s | 40.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.169 TFLOPS | 1,299.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 122 W | Not recorded |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Not recorded |

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

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | Not recorded |

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

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | Not recorded |

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

| Vulkan Version | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm length, 111 mm height | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2012-08-16 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Fermi | Solar System |

| Successor | Quadro Maxwell | Polaris Mobile |

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

| Geekbench Metal Score | 6324 | Not recorded |

| Geekbench OpenCL Score | 11418 | 8273 |

| Geekbench Vulkan Score | 11169 | 8377 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 46 | 43 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 9637 | 8325 |