AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX vs NVIDIA Quadro K5200 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K5200 and AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX represent two distant eras of GPU design, separated by over eight years of architectural evolution. The data shows a stark contrast: the Quadro K5200, a Kepler-generation workstation card from 2014, and the RX 7900 XTX, an RDNA 3.0 flagship from late 2022, share the same overall percentile ranking (64th) among all GPUs, yet their benchmark scores tell a story of near-total generational dominance by the newer AMD part. The RX 7900 XTX wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons decisively, but the Quadro K5200’s presence in the same performance percentile underscores how differently these cards are positioned for their respective workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX is the clear winner in every benchmark category where both cards have data. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7900 XTX scores 50,465 against the Quadro K5200’s 19,024, a delta of -62.3% from the AMD card’s perspective, meaning the Quadro is roughly 2.65 times slower. The margin grows even larger in Geekbench Vulkan: the RX 7900 XTX posts 85,612 versus the Quadro’s 20,180, a -76.4% delta. This is not a close contest in raw compute or modern API performance. The RX 7900 XTX also benefits from a much broader benchmark suite, including PassMark tests across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, as well as 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it scores 6,841. The Quadro K5200 has no data for these modern tests, which reflects its age and the fact that it was never designed for gaming or contemporary DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads.

However, the Quadro K5200’s win condition is not in raw performance but in its historical role as a professional workstation card. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro D300 (average score 19,637, delta -0.2%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB (average score 19,334, delta 1.4%), placing it in the same performance class as those cards. For legacy professional applications that rely on OpenGL 4.6 or Vulkan 1.2.175 support, the Quadro K5200 remains serviceable, though its 8 GB GDDR5 memory and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth are dwarfed by the RX 7900 XTX’s 24 GB GDDR6 and 960.0 GB/s. The data indicates that the RX 7900 XTX wins in every measurable head-to-head scenario, while the Quadro K5200’s only advantage is its compatibility with older software ecosystems that predate RDNA 3.0.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is massive. The Quadro K5200 uses the GK110B chip on a 28 nm process from TSMC, featuring 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the RX 7900 XTX uses the Navi 31 chip on a 5 nm process (also TSMC), packing 57,700 million transistors into a slightly smaller 529 mm² die, achieving a density of 109.1 million transistors per square millimeter — an 8.7x improvement in density. The Quadro K5200 is built on the Kepler architecture, while the RX 7900 XTX uses RDNA 3.0, codenamed Plum Bonito. The Quadro belongs to the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation, whereas the RX 7900 XTX is part of the Navi III (RX 7000) series.

Core configuration differences are equally stark. The Quadro K5200 has 2,304 shading units, 192 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 raster operation units (ROPs). The RX 7900 XTX more than doubles those numbers: 6,144 shading units, 384 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The AMD card also includes 96 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Kepler-based Quadro. Neither card has tensor cores. Clock speeds reflect the process node leap: the Quadro runs at a base of 667 MHz and boost of 771 MHz, while the RX 7900 XTX runs at 1,929 MHz base and 2,498 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2,365 MHz. Memory architectures diverge completely: the Quadro uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus (192.3 GB/s), while the RX 7900 XTX uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus (960.0 GB/s). The FP32 compute rate is 3.553 TFLOPS for the Quadro versus 61.39 TFLOPS for the RX 7900 XTX, which also offers FP16 at 122.8 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) — a feature the Quadro lacks entirely.

The RX 7900 XTX supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Quadro versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 7900 XTX. Power requirements reflect the performance gap: the Quadro consumes 150 W TDP with a 450 W suggested PSU and a single 6-pin connector, while the RX 7900 XTX draws 355 W TDP, requires a 750 W PSU, and uses two 8-pin connectors. Both are dual-slot cards, but the RX 7900 XTX is physically longer (287 mm vs 267 mm) and wider (51 mm vs 111 mm height for the Quadro, though the Quadro’s width is not specified).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5200 has a higher average benchmark score of 19,602, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX’s 19,410. This is a -1% difference in favor of the Quadro, despite the RX 7900 XTX winning every head-to-head test.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Quadro K5200 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, while the RX 7900 XTX has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus. The RX 7900 XTX also delivers 960.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 192.3 GB/s for the Quadro.

Q: How do the FP32 compute capabilities compare?

A: The RX 7900 XTX delivers 61.39 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is over 17 times higher than the Quadro K5200’s 3.553 TFLOPS. The RX 7900 XTX also supports FP16 at 122.8 TFLOPS, while the Quadro has no FP16 capability.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 7900 XTX includes 96 ray tracing cores, while the Quadro K5200 has no ray tracing hardware at all, reflecting its 2014 Kepler architecture.

Q: What are the production statuses?

A: Both GPUs are end-of-life. The Quadro K5200 was released on July 21, 2014, and the RX 7900 XTX was released on November 2, 2022.

Q: Which card has a better Vulkan score?

A: The RX 7900 XTX scores 85,612 in Geekbench Vulkan, compared to the Quadro K5200’s 20,180. The RX 7900 XTX also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro supports only Vulkan 1.2.175.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification field except for OpenGL support (both 4.6), slot width (both dual-slot), and production status (both end-of-life). The key differences are:

• Chip and Architecture: GK110B on Kepler (Quadro) vs Navi 31 on RDNA 3.0 (RX 7900 XTX)
• Process Node: 28 nm vs 5 nm, both TSMC
• Transistors: 7,080 million vs 57,700 million
• Die Size: 561 mm² vs 529 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.6M / mm² vs 109.1M / mm²
• Base Clock: 667 MHz vs 1,929 MHz
• Boost Clock: 771 MHz vs 2,498 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) vs 2,500 MHz (20 Gbps effective)
• Memory Size: 8 GB GDDR5 vs 24 GB GDDR6
• Memory Bus: 256 bit vs 384 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 192.3 GB/s vs 960.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 2,304 vs 6,144
• TMUs: 192 vs 384
• ROPs: 48 vs 192
• RT Cores: None vs 96
• Pixel Rate: 37.01 GPixel/s vs 479.6 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 148.0 GTexel/s vs 959.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: 3.553 TFLOPS vs 61.39 TFLOPS
• FP16: None vs 122.8 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 150 W vs 355 W
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 2x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: 450 W vs 750 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display Outputs: 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 vs 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
• DirectX Support: 12 (11_1) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Vulkan Support: 1.2.175 vs 1.4
• Dimensions: 267 mm x 111 mm vs 287 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm
• Release Date: July 21, 2014 vs November 2, 2022

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data consists of two Geekbench tests, and the RX 7900 XTX dominates both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7900 XTX scores 50,465 against the Quadro K5200’s 19,024. The delta of -62.3% (from the AMD card’s vantage) means the Quadro trails by a factor of 2.65x. This is a decisive win for the AMD card, reflecting its 17.3x higher FP32 throughput and vastly superior memory bandwidth. The Quadro’s 3.553 TFLOPS and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth were respectable for 2014, but the RX 7900 XTX’s 61.39 TFLOPS and 960.0 GB/s are in a different class entirely.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further. The RX 7900 XTX scores 85,612, while the Quadro K5200 manages only 20,180, a -76.4% delta. This 4.24x difference highlights the architectural leap: the RX 7900 XTX’s Vulkan 1.4 support and modern RDNA 3.0 design are far better suited to the low-level API, whereas the Quadro’s Vulkan 1.2.175 support on Kepler hardware is limited by its older shader core design and lack of dedicated compute features. The Quadro’s nearest rival average score of 19,637 (AMD FirePro D300) shows it is competitive with its contemporaries, but against the RX 7900 XTX, the data shows no contest.

The RX 7900 XTX also has a broader benchmark footprint, with PassMark scores including 31,238 in G3D, 17,689 in GPU compute, and 1,267 in G2D, plus DirectX 9 through 12 scores ranging from 131 to 356. The Quadro K5200 has no comparable data for these tests, which means its performance in legacy DirectX workloads cannot be directly compared. In the two shared tests, the RX 7900 XTX wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head wins. The average benchmark scores, however, show the Quadro K5200 at 19,602 versus the RX 7900 XTX’s 19,410, a 1% difference in the Quadro’s favor. This paradox — losing every head-to-head but having a higher average — is explained by the fact that the Quadro’s average is based on only two benchmark scores, while the RX 7900 XTX’s average spans ten tests, including demanding modern workloads like 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (6,841) and PassMark G3D (31,238). The RX 7900 XTX’s performance is far more consistent and scalable across the latest software, whereas the Quadro K5200’s scores are inflated by its relatively strong showing in OpenCL and Vulkan given its age.