AMD Radeon RX 560 XT vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 are both end-of-life professional and consumer-grade graphics cards, but they target very different priorities. In the recorded benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT holds a clear performance advantage over the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 in both tested workloads, winning the head-to-head comparison with a 2-0 record. The RX 560 XT delivers 6.5% higher OpenCL performance and a substantial 12% higher Vulkan score, making it the stronger choice for compute-oriented tasks. However, the Quadro M5000 counters with twice the memory capacity, a different architectural foundation, and a higher overall GPU percentile ranking among its own peers. This analysis breaks down the measured results, architectural differences, and the specific use cases where each card excels based solely on the data available.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins both recorded tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 560 XT scores 31,387 points against the Quadro M5000's 29,481 points, a delta of 6.5% in favor of AMD. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens considerably: the RX 560 XT posts 36,879 points versus 32,931 points for the Quadro M5000, a 12% advantage. These are not marginal differences, especially in the Vulkan test, where the AMD card holds a decisive lead.

Looking at the broader database context, the RX 560 XT's average benchmark score of 34,133 places it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro M5000's average of 31,206 sits in the 76th percentile. The RX 560 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB at 34,154 (a -0.1% delta), the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at 34,207 (-0.2%), the AMD Radeon RX 480 at 33,997 (+0.4%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7950 at 33,951 (+0.5%). This clustering shows the RX 560 XT is essentially performance-equivalent to those cards, within a half-percent either way. Meanwhile, the Quadro M5000's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q at 31,220 (0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER at 31,087 (+0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell at 31,532 (-1%), and the NVIDIA TITAN RTX at 31,676 (-1.5%). The Quadro M5000 sits right at the center of that group, meaning its compute scores are typical for its class.

The head-to-head deltas are consistent across both APIs. The 6.5% OpenCL win and the 12% Vulkan win both favor the RX 560 XT, and no benchmark in the recorded data shows the Quadro M5000 ahead. The Vulkan test, in particular, highlights a meaningful architectural efficiency gap: the RX 560 XT achieves its higher score with fewer shading units (1,792 versus 2,048) and a lower texture rate (137.3 GTexel/s versus 132.9 GTexel/s), yet still outperforms the NVIDIA card by double digits. This suggests the AMD architecture handles Vulkan workloads more effectively in this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different design generations. The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, from the Quadro Maxwell (Mx000) generation, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node gap is significant: 14 nm versus 28 nm, which explains why the AMD chip packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip fits 5,200 million transistors into a much larger 398 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: 24.6M per mm² for the RX 560 XT versus 13.1M per mm² for the Quadro M5000, nearly double the density on the AMD side.

Clock speeds also diverge. The RX 560 XT runs at a base clock of 1074 MHz and a boost clock of 1226 MHz, while the Quadro M5000 operates at 861 MHz base and 1038 MHz boost. The AMD card's higher clocks contribute directly to its compute advantage. Memory clocks follow a similar pattern: the RX 560 XT runs its GDDR5 memory at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), versus 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) for the Quadro M5000. Despite this, the Quadro M5000's memory bandwidth is 211.6 GB/s, only slightly below the RX 560 XT's 224.0 GB/s, because both use a 256-bit bus.

The shader and output configurations differ as well. The RX 560 XT has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro M5000 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, giving it double the pixel rate at 66.43 GPixel/s versus 39.23 GPixel/s for the AMD card. In raw compute, the RX 560 XT achieves 4.394 TFLOPS FP32, slightly ahead of the Quadro M5000's 4.252 TFLOPS. Notably, the RX 560 XT also supports FP16 at 4.394 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the Quadro M5000 has no listed FP16 capability. The RX 560 XT supports DirectX 12_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3; the Quadro M5000 supports DirectX 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, a higher Vulkan version.

Display outputs also differ: the RX 560 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro M5000 provides 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2. The NVIDIA card supports an older DisplayPort standard, which matters for multi-monitor setups with modern high-refresh displays. Both cards are dual-slot, use a single 6-pin power connector, require a 450 W power supply, and connect via PCIe 3.0 x16. The physical dimensions differ slightly: the RX 560 XT is 241 mm long, while the Quadro M5000 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins in raw compute benchmarks. Its OpenCL score of 31,387 and Vulkan score of 36,879 both surpass the Quadro M5000, and the 12% Vulkan lead is particularly strong. The RX 560 XT also has a higher average benchmark score (34,133 versus 31,206) and a higher percentile rank (79th versus 76th). For tasks that rely on FP32 or FP16 compute, the RX 560 XT's 4.394 TFLOPS and 1:1 FP16 support give it a measurable edge. The higher memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s) also helps in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. Its smaller physical footprint (241 mm versus 267 mm) makes it easier to fit into compact cases, and its DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support newer display standards compared to the Quadro M5000's DisplayPort 1.2.

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 wins in memory capacity and pixel throughput. It offers 8 GB of GDDR5 memory versus 4 GB on the RX 560 XT, which is critical for workloads that exceed a 4 GB footprint, such as large texture sets, high-resolution scene data, or multi-app professional workflows. Its 64 ROPs deliver a pixel rate of 66.43 GPixel/s, nearly 70% higher than the RX 560 XT's 39.23 GPixel/s, favoring rasterization-heavy tasks like viewport rendering in CAD or GIS applications. The Quadro M5000 also has more shading units (2,048 versus 1,792) and more TMUs (128 versus 112), though its lower clocks cap the realized advantage in compute. Its Vulkan 1.4 API support is newer than the RX 560 XT's Vulkan 1.3, which could matter for applications that leverage the latest Vulkan features. The Quadro M5000's 267 mm length and 111 mm height are larger, but that comes with a professional workstation form factor designed for sustained use.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT has an average benchmark score of 34,133, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro M5000's 31,206. The RX 560 XT also sits in the 79th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 76th percentile for the Quadro M5000.

Q: How much faster is the RX 560 XT in Vulkan?

A: The RX 560 XT scores 36,879 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Quadro M5000 scores 32,931. That is a 12% advantage for the AMD card.

Q: Does the Quadro M5000 have more memory?

A: Yes, the Quadro M5000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the RX 560 XT has 4 GB. Both use a 256-bit memory bus, but the RX 560 XT has higher bandwidth at 224.0 GB/s versus 211.6 GB/s.

Q: What are the process nodes for these GPUs?

A: The RX 560 XT is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Quadro M5000 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 560 XT has a transistor density of 24.6M per mm² versus 13.1M per mm² for the Quadro M5000.

Q: Which card supports FP16 compute?

A: Only the RX 560 XT lists FP16 support, at 4.394 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The Quadro M5000 has no listed FP16 capability.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference?

A: The Quadro M5000 has a pixel rate of 66.43 GPixel/s, while the RX 560 XT achieves 39.23 GPixel/s. The Quadro M5000's 64 ROPs drive this advantage over the RX 560 XT's 32 ROPs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The RX 560 XT uses a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, while the Quadro M5000 uses a 28 nm TSMC process with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. Transistor density is 24.6M per mm² for AMD versus 13.1M per mm² for NVIDIA. Clock speeds: the RX 560 XT runs at 1074 MHz base and 1226 MHz boost, the Quadro M5000 at 861 MHz base and 1038 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for AMD versus 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA. Memory capacity is 4 GB for the RX 560 XT and 8 GB for the Quadro M5000, both GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but bandwidth is 224.0 GB/s versus 211.6 GB/s. Shading units: 1,792 versus 2,048. TMUs: 112 versus 128. ROPs: 32 versus 64. Pixel rate: 39.23 GPixel/s versus 66.43 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 137.3 GTexel/s versus 132.9 GTexel/s. FP32: 4.394 TFLOPS versus 4.252 TFLOPS. FP16: 4.394 TFLOPS for AMD, none listed for NVIDIA. API support: DirectX 12_0 versus 12_1, Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.4, OpenGL 4.6 for both. Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b plus 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for AMD, 1x DVI plus 4x DisplayPort 1.2 for NVIDIA. Dimensions: 241 mm length for the RX 560 XT, 267 mm length and 111 mm height for the Quadro M5000. Both are dual-slot, use a single 6-pin connector, require a 450 W PSU, and use PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT as the stronger performer in compute benchmarks. It wins both head-to-head tests, delivers a higher average score, and holds a higher percentile rank. For users prioritizing raw OpenCL or Vulkan performance, FP16 support, or higher memory bandwidth, the RX 560 XT is the clear choice. Its smaller size and newer DisplayPort standard add practical advantages.

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000, however, justifies its place for memory-intensive and rasterization-heavy workloads. Its 8 GB frame buffer doubles the RX 560 XT's 4 GB, making it the better option for tasks that need to hold large datasets in VRAM. Its 64 ROPs and 66.43 GPixel/s pixel rate give it a decisive edge in pixel-bound rendering, and its Vulkan 1.4 support is more current. Users who need those specific attributes should choose the Quadro M5000 despite its lower compute scores. For general compute performance, the RX 560 XT wins outright.