AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 are both end-of-life graphics cards, but they target entirely different segments of the market. The RX 5700 is a consumer gaming card built on AMD's RDNA 1.0 architecture, while the Quadro RTX 5000 is a professional workstation solution based on NVIDIA's Turing architecture. The benchmark data reveals a clear performance hierarchy, with the Quadro RTX 5000 winning 7 out of 9 head-to-head tests, yet the RX 5700 still holds its own in specific legacy and 2D workloads. The following analysis breaks down the measured scores, architectural differences, and specification gaps to determine which card is better suited for which task.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 92,309 against the RX 5700's 64,166. That is a 30.5% lead for NVIDIA, and it represents the single largest performance gap in the entire comparison. This is not a marginal edge; it indicates that the Turing architecture's driver optimization and compute scheduling provide a substantial advantage in modern, low-level graphics APIs.

The Quadro RTX 5000 also dominates in DirectX 11 and DirectX 10 workloads. In Passmark DirectX 11, the NVIDIA card scores 140 versus 101 for AMD, a 27.9% difference. The DirectX 10 test shows a similar story: 113 for the Quadro against 87 for the RX 5700, a 23% gap. These results suggest that the Quadro's higher shading unit count and texture rate translate directly into superior performance in legacy rasterization pipelines, which are still common in professional CAD and 3D modeling applications.

Geekbench OpenCL is another win for NVIDIA, with the Quadro RTX 5000 posting 78,999 versus 69,603 for the RX 5700. The 11.9% delta is significant, though not as dramatic as the Vulkan result. This test is particularly relevant for compute-heavy tasks like rendering and scientific simulation, where the Quadro's 3,072 shading units and 384 tensor cores give it a raw throughput advantage over the RX 5700's 2,304 shading units.

In the Passmark G3D test, which is a broad measure of overall 3D graphics performance, the Quadro RTX 5000 wins again, but by a narrower margin: 15,616 versus 14,314, an 8.3% lead. This shows that while the NVIDIA card is faster, the RX 5700 is not completely outclassed in general gaming-like workloads. The Passmark GPU Compute test is essentially a tie: 6,525 for NVIDIA and 6,517 for AMD, a negligible 0.1% difference. And in DirectX 12, the Quadro wins by just 8.5% (59 versus 54), suggesting that the RX 5700's RDNA architecture is more competitive in newer APIs than in older ones.

The AMD Radeon RX 5700 does claim two outright wins, and they are worth highlighting. The first is in Passmark DirectX 9, where AMD scores 209 against NVIDIA's 195, a 7.2% advantage. The second is in Passmark G2D (2D graphics), where the RX 5700 scores 877 versus 709 for the Quadro, a commanding 23.7% lead. These results indicate that the RX 5700 retains a strong edge in legacy 2D applications and older DirectX 9 titles, likely due to its higher pixel rate of 110.4 GPixel/s and more efficient RDNA pipeline for those specific workloads.

Looking at the overall average benchmark score, the RX 5700 actually comes out ahead: 22,170 versus 21,629 for the Quadro RTX 5000. However, this aggregate figure is skewed by the RX 5700's massive G2D score. Both cards sit at the 67th percentile among all GPUs, and the nearest rivals for the RX 5700 include the GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (1.2% higher) and the Radeon RX 7700 XT (1.7% higher), while the Quadro RTX 5000's closest competitor is the GTX 1060 6 GB (1% higher). This places both cards in the same performance tier overall, despite the Quadro's wins in most individual tests.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the majority of benchmark tests?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 wins 7 out of 9 head-to-head benchmarks, including all Geekbench tests and the Passmark G3D, DirectX 10, DirectX 11, and DirectX 12 tests. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 wins only the DirectX 9 and G2D tests.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Quadro RTX 5000 scores 92,309 against the RX 5700's 64,166, giving NVIDIA a 30.5% lead. This is the largest delta of any test in the comparison.

Q: Is the AMD card faster in any compute workload?

A: The Passmark GPU Compute test is effectively a tie, with NVIDIA scoring 6,525 and AMD scoring 6,517, a difference of only 0.1%. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro RTX 5000 is faster by 11.9%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 has a higher average benchmark score of 22,170, compared to 21,629 for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000. This is largely driven by the RX 5700's 23.7% advantage in the Passmark G2D test.

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

A: Both cards are rated at the 67th percentile among all GPUs, indicating they perform at a similar overall level despite their different strengths and weaknesses.

Q: How do the cards compare in DirectX 11 performance?

A: The Quadro RTX 5000 scores 140 in Passmark DirectX 11, which is 27.9% higher than the RX 5700's 101. This is one of the larger performance gaps in favor of the NVIDIA card.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architecture differences between these two cards are stark. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 is built on the Navi 10 chip using the RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. It contains 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 41.0M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 chip with the Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. The TU104 packs 13,600 million transistors on a much larger 545 mm² die, resulting in a lower transistor density of 25.0M per mm².

The process node difference is significant: the 7 nm process allows AMD to fit more transistors per area and achieve higher clock speeds at lower power. However, NVIDIA compensates with a much larger die and more raw hardware. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs), while the RX 5700 has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro also features 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, which are entirely absent from the RX 5700. These dedicated cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based tensor operations, giving the Quadro capabilities that the RX 5700 simply does not possess at the hardware level.

The memory subsystem is another area of divergence. Both cards use GDDR6 memory and have a 256-bit bus, but the Quadro RTX 5000 doubles the capacity to 16 GB versus 8 GB for the RX 5700. Memory bandwidth is identical at 448.0 GB/s, and both run at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. However, the Quadro's larger frame buffer is critical for professional workloads like large 3D scenes, AI training, and high-resolution rendering, where 8 GB can be a hard limit.

The API support also differs. The RX 5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro RTX 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading, as well as OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. This means the Quadro is ready for the latest DirectX 12 Ultimate games, while the RX 5700 is limited to the older 12_1 feature level.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is memory capacity: the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 has 8 GB. Both have a 256-bit bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, but the Quadro's double capacity is a decisive factor for professional applications.

The process node and die size also differ significantly. The RX 5700 uses a 7 nm process with a 251 mm² die, while the Quadro RTX 5000 uses a 12 nm process with a 545 mm² die. This leads to different transistor counts: 10,300 million for AMD versus 13,600 million for NVIDIA.

The clock speeds are higher on the Quadro RTX 5000, with a base clock of 1620 MHz and a boost clock of 1815 MHz, compared to 1465 MHz base and 1725 MHz boost for the RX 5700. The RX 5700 also has a game clock of 1625 MHz, a feature not present on the Quadro.

The compute specifications are also distinct. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 48 RT cores, and 384 tensor cores. The RX 5700 has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and no RT or tensor cores. The pixel rate is slightly higher on the Quadro at 116.2 GPixel/s versus 110.4 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is also higher at 348.5 GTexel/s versus 248.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 11.15 TFLOPS for the Quadro and 7.949 TFLOPS for the RX 5700, with FP16 performance at 22.30 TFLOPS and 15.90 TFLOPS respectively.

The power requirements differ as well. The Quadro RTX 5000 has a TDP of 230 W and recommends a 550 W power supply, while the RX 5700 has a TDP of 180 W and recommends a 450 W PSU. Both use a dual-slot cooler and require a 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connector.

The bus interface is different: the RX 5700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Quadro RTX 5000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs also differ, with the RX 5700 offering 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C. The launch MSRP is 349 USD for the RX 5700 and 2,299 USD for the Quadro RTX 5000.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is the faster card in the vast majority of tests. It wins 7 of 9 head-to-head comparisons, with particularly large margins in Vulkan (30.5%), DirectX 11 (27.9%), and DirectX 10 (23%). Its higher shading unit count, texture rate, and FP32 throughput make it the clear choice for compute-heavy professional workloads, and its 16 GB of memory is essential for large datasets and high-resolution rendering. The inclusion of RT cores and tensor cores also gives it hardware capabilities that the RX 5700 lacks entirely.

However, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 is not without its strengths. It wins the DirectX 9 test by 7.2% and the G2D test by a massive 23.7%, making it a better option for legacy 2D applications and older DirectX 9 titles. It also has a higher average benchmark score (22,170 versus 21,629) and runs on a more efficient 7 nm process with a lower TDP of 180 W versus 230 W. For gamers on a budget, the RX 5700 offers competitive performance in modern APIs like DirectX 12, where it trails by only 8.5%, and it supports PCIe 4.0 for newer platforms.

The data suggests that the Quadro RTX 5000 is the superior choice for professionals who need maximum compute performance, ray tracing, and large memory capacity. The RX 5700 is better suited for users who prioritize 2D performance, legacy compatibility, and efficiency, and who do not require the Quadro's workstation-specific features. Both cards are end-of-life, so the decision ultimately comes down to whether the Quadro's 30.5% Vulkan lead and 16 GB memory are worth the massive price premium. For raw gaming performance per dollar, the RX 5700 is the more sensible pick, but for professional workloads, the Quadro RTX 5000's data speaks for itself.