AMD Radeon R9 M395X vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data pits the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 directly against the AMD Radeon R9 M395X in a single shared benchmark: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are decisive. The Quadro M5000 scores 29,481 points, while the Radeon R9 M395X manages 17,829 points. That works out to a 65.4% advantage for the NVIDIA card. In practical terms, for any OpenCL compute workload, the Quadro M5000 completes the task in roughly 60% of the time the AMD part would require, assuming linear scaling.

This is not a close contest. The delta of 65.4% places the Quadro M5000 in a completely different performance tier for this specific API. The Radeon R9 M395X does not win a single head-to-head benchmark in the database. The win count stands at 1 for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

It is worth remembering the AMD card has a separate benchmark result in Geekbench Metal, scoring 33,953 points, but the Quadro M5000 has no corresponding Metal result. Conversely, the NVIDIA card has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 32,931, while the AMD part has no Vulkan result in the database. These are not directly comparable, but they hint at platform-specific strengths that will be explored later.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the gap narrows somewhat but remains substantial. The Quadro M5000 averages 31,206 points across all recorded tests, placing it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon R9 M395X averages 25,891 points, sitting in the 71st percentile. That is a 17% difference in average score, which is less dramatic than the OpenCL head-to-head but still clearly favors NVIDIA.

The nearest rivals for each card provide additional context. The Quadro M5000 sits among cards like the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q (31,220, 0% delta), the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676, -1.5% delta), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532, -1% delta). The Radeon R9 M395X is grouped with the AMD FirePro W7100 (25,856, 0.1% delta), the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842, 0.2% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740, 0.6% delta). The NVIDIA card is competing with much more modern and expensive hardware, while the AMD card is clustered with older workstation parts.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear split by API and platform. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 dominates in OpenCL compute, which is the only test where both cards have recorded scores. For users running OpenCL-heavy applications, the choice is unambiguous: the Quadro M5000 delivers 65.4% more performance.

The AMD Radeon R9 M395X does have one notable advantage: its Metal score. The 33,953 points recorded in Geekbench Metal indicate that on Apple platforms, where Metal is the primary graphics and compute API, the AMD card performs very well. This makes sense given the R9 M395X was designed as a mobile part for portable devices, and the database notes its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." The Quadro M5000 has no Metal result, so it cannot be compared on that API.

For Vulkan, the situation is reversed in terms of data availability. The Quadro M5000 has a Vulkan score of 32,931, while the Radeon R9 M395X has no recorded Vulkan benchmark. The NVIDIA card supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.2.170. This suggests the Quadro M5000 is better positioned for modern Vulkan-based workloads, though the lack of a direct comparison means this is inferred rather than measured.

In terms of raw compute specifications, the Quadro M5000 also leads. Its FP32 throughput is 4.252 TFLOPS versus 2.961 TFLOPS for the AMD card. The NVIDIA card has a higher pixel rate at 66.43 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate at 132.9 GTexel/s versus 92.54 GTexel/s. These specification differences align with the benchmark results.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 uses the GM204 chip, built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. It is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.1M per mm². The AMD Radeon R9 M395X uses the Amethyst chip, based on GCN 3.0 architecture, also on a 28 nm TSMC process. It packs 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die, resulting in a slightly higher transistor density of 13.7M per mm².

Both cards have 2,048 shading units and 128 texture mapping units. The key difference lies in the render output units. The Quadro M5000 has 64 ROPs, while the Radeon R9 M395X has only 32. This explains the large gap in pixel rate: 66.43 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card can fill the framebuffer more than twice as fast, which is critical for high-resolution rendering and multi-sample anti-aliasing.

Memory configurations are similar on the surface: both have 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. However, the memory clocks differ significantly. The Quadro M5000 runs its memory at 1653 MHz, translating to 6.6 Gbps effective, yielding a bandwidth of 211.6 GB/s. The Radeon R9 M395X runs at 1250 MHz, or 5 Gbps effective, for a bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has 32% more memory bandwidth, which directly impacts performance in bandwidth-bound workloads.

Clock speeds also differ, though the AMD card has no recorded base or boost clocks. The Quadro M5000 has a base clock of 861 MHz and a boost clock of 1038 MHz. The AMD card's memory clock is the only clock listed. In terms of power, the Quadro M5000 has a TDP of 150 W and requires a 450 W power supply, while the Radeon R9 M395X has a TDP of just 75 W and draws power from the portable device it is installed in, requiring no external power connectors.

The form factors reflect their intended use cases. The Quadro M5000 is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, with a 1x 6-pin power connector. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and offers 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The Radeon R9 M395X is an MXM module, with no listed dimensions, no power connectors, and display outputs that depend on the host device. This is a mobile or small-form-factor part, not a desktop card.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most use cases. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 outperforms the AMD Radeon R9 M395X by 65.4% in OpenCL compute, has 32% more memory bandwidth, more than double the pixel rate, and over 40% higher FP32 throughput. Its average benchmark score is 20.5% higher, and it sits in a higher percentile of all GPUs (76th versus 71st).

The Quadro M5000 is the better choice for any workload that relies on OpenCL, Vulkan, or traditional desktop GPU rendering. Its higher ROP count and memory bandwidth make it particularly well-suited for high-resolution displays, heavy anti-aliasing, and compute tasks that stress memory throughput.

The Radeon R9 M395X has one clear advantage: its Metal performance. The 33,953 Metal score suggests it is a strong choice for Apple ecosystem users, particularly in portable devices where its 75 W TDP and MXM form factor are major benefits. It also supports DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the Quadro M5000's 12_1, though both support OpenGL 4.6.

For a desktop workstation, the Quadro M5000 is the obvious pick. For an Apple portable or a system that relies heavily on Metal, the Radeon R9 M395X has a role. The choice ultimately depends on the platform and API requirements, but the raw compute data favors NVIDIA decisively.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 scores 29,481, while the AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 17,829, giving the NVIDIA card a 65.4% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M395X win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The database records 1 win for the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 and 0 wins for the AMD Radeon R9 M395X.

Q: How do the two cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has 211.6 GB/s of bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon R9 M395X has 160.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card leads by 32%.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 delivers 4.252 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon R9 M395X delivers 2.961 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card is about 44% higher.

Q: Which card is better for Metal-based applications?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M395X has a Geekbench Metal score of 33,953. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has no recorded Metal score, so the AMD card is the only option for that API.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 has a TDP of 150 W and requires a 450 W power supply with a 1x 6-pin connector. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X has a TDP of 75 W and requires no external power connectors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M5000 | AMD Radeon R9 M395X |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 3.0 |

| Chip | GM204 | Amethyst |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 5,000 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 366 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 13.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 861 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 211.6 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 66.43 GPixel/s | 23.14 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 132.9 GTexel/s | 92.54 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.252 TFLOPS | 2.961 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not specified | 2.961 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | Not specified |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 111 mm | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2015-06-28 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Kepler | Solar System |

| Successor | Quadro Pascal | Polaris Mobile |

| Average Benchmark Score | 31,206 | 25,891 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 76 | 71 |