AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA Quadro K5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear split between these two cards, with the AMD Radeon RX 550 taking two of the three recorded tests. The largest margin is in Geekbench Metal, where the RX 550 scores 20,838 against the Quadro K5000's 6,324, a 229.5% advantage. That is not a marginal gap; it is a generational leap in compute throughput for Apple's Metal API, and it reflects how much GPU architecture advanced between 2012 and 2017.

The Vulkan test also favors the RX 550, though by a smaller margin. The AMD card scores 12,270 versus 11,169 for the Quadro K5000, a 9.9% lead. That is a meaningful win for modern API compatibility and driver efficiency, but it is not the kind of result that redefines a product tier. The Quadro K5000 fights back in OpenCL, where it scores 11,418 against the RX 550's 11,063, a 3.1% advantage. That is a narrow win, but it matters for professional compute workloads that rely on OpenCL rather than newer APIs.

Looking at the overall averages, the RX 550 posts an average benchmark score of 11,075, placing it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Quadro K5000 averages 9,637, which lands at the 46th percentile. The RX 550's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q at 11,088 (0.1% higher) and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER at 11,047 (0.3% lower). The Quadro K5000 sits near the GeForce GTX 960M at 9,645 (0.1% lower) and the Quadro P4000 at 9,665 (0.3% lower). These deltas are small, meaning both cards are tightly clustered with their direct competitors, but the RX 550 holds a clear tier advantage over the K5000 in raw aggregate performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap here is substantial. The RX 550 uses AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with the Lexa chip containing 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. The Quadro K5000 uses NVIDIA's Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with the GK104 chip packing 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The RX 550 achieves a transistor density of 21.4 million per mm², while the K5000 manages only 12.0 million per mm². That density difference explains why the newer, smaller chip can deliver competitive or superior performance despite having fewer transistors overall.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The RX 550 runs at a base of 1100 MHz and boosts to 1183 MHz, while the K5000 is locked at 706 MHz for both base and boost. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 550 uses 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the K5000 runs at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective). The K5000 compensates with a wider 256-bit bus and 4 GB of memory, yielding 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, versus the RX 550's 128-bit bus, 2 GB capacity, and 112.0 GB/s. The K5000 also has more raw compute resources: 1536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, against the RX 550's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the K5000 at 22.59 GPixel/s versus 18.93 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 90.37 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 2.169 TFLOPS for the K5000 versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS for the RX 550. The RX 550 does support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (1,211.4 GFLOPS), while the K5000 has no FP16 path.

API support also diverges. The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RX 550's newer Vulkan version and full DirectX 12 feature level give it a software advantage, which shows in the Vulkan benchmark result. Power consumption is starkly different: the RX 550 draws 50 W with no power connectors and a suggested 250 W PSU, while the K5000 draws 122 W, requires a single 6-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. Physical dimensions also differ: the RX 550 is 145 mm (5.7 inches) long, while the K5000 is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall. Both are dual-slot cards.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Metal benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 is dramatically faster, scoring 20,838 versus 6,324 for the Quadro K5000, a 229.5% advantage.

Q: Does the Quadro K5000 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the K5000 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 11,418 against the RX 550's 11,063, a 3.1% margin.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro K5000 has 172.8 GB/s bandwidth from a 256-bit bus and 4 GB GDDR5, while the RX 550 has 112.0 GB/s from a 128-bit bus and 2 GB GDDR5.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The Radeon RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, while the Quadro K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The RX 550 has a 50 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the K5000 has a 122 W TDP and requires a 6-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the RX 550 and 300 W for the K5000.

Q: How do they compare in aggregate benchmark scores?

A: The RX 550 averages 11,075 and sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the K5000 averages 9,637 and sits at the 46th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 550 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Kepler |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1183 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 172.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 32 | 128 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.93 GPixel/s | 22.59 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.86 GTexel/s | 90.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,211.4 GFLOPS | 2.169 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 50 W | 122 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.175 |

| Length | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2017-04-19 | 2012-08-16 |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear decision for most users. The AMD Radeon RX 550 wins the head-to-head record with two benchmark victories out of three, including a massive 229.5% lead in Metal and a 9.9% lead in Vulkan. Its aggregate average score of 11,075 also outranks the K5000's 9,637, and it does so while drawing only 50 W, requiring no power connector, and fitting in a 145 mm length. The Quadro K5000 retains advantages in raw shading resources, memory capacity, bandwidth, and FP32 throughput, which explains its OpenCL win and its higher pixel and texture rates. However, those advantages do not translate into overall benchmark superiority. The RX 550 is the newer architecture with better API support, lower power draw, and a smaller physical footprint. For anyone choosing between these two cards based on the recorded data, the RX 550 is the stronger all-around performer, despite the K5000's larger memory pool and compute resources.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 550 is the pick for modern API workloads. It wins Metal by a landslide and Vulkan by a solid margin, making it the better choice for applications that leverage DirectX 12, Vulkan 1.3, or Apple's Metal framework. Its low 50 W TDP and lack of power connectors also make it suitable for compact, low-power builds where the K5000's 122 W draw and 6-pin requirement would be a burden. The RX 550's smaller 145 mm length is another practical advantage for small-form-factor systems.

The NVIDIA Quadro K5000 takes the OpenCL benchmark, so it is the better option for legacy compute stacks that rely on OpenCL rather than newer APIs. Its 4 GB memory and 256-bit bus provide 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, which is 54% higher than the RX 550's 112.0 GB/s, and its FP32 output of 2.169 TFLOPS is nearly double the RX 550's 1,211.4 GFLOPS. The K5000 also has higher pixel and texture rates, so workloads that are fill-rate bound or that need large framebuffers may still favor it. Its dual DVI outputs and dual DisplayPort 1.2 connections differ from the RX 550's single DVI, HDMI 2.0b, and DisplayPort 1.4a, which could matter for specific multi-display setups. In short, the RX 550 wins the modern API race, while the K5000 remains relevant for OpenCL-heavy, bandwidth-hungry, or fill-rate-limited tasks.