NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 vs NVIDIA Quadro M500M Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two mobile-class GPUs into distinct tiers. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 holds a clear performance advantage in the only shared benchmark, scoring 6698 in Geekbench OpenCL against 5986 for the NVIDIA Quadro M500M, a delta of 11.9%. The GT 1010 also sits higher in the overall database percentile ranking, at 38th percentile versus the Quadro's 32nd. For users choosing strictly on compute throughput, the GT 1010 is the stronger pick, particularly for OpenCL-accelerated workloads. However, the Quadro M500M is the only one of the two with a Vulkan benchmark result in the database, scoring 5222, which indicates some capability in that API that the GT 1010 lacks in recorded data. The GT 1010 is the default choice for general compute tasks and newer API support, while the Quadro M500M holds a niche for Vulkan-specific scenarios. The GT 1010 wins the only direct head-to-head comparison, but the Quadro's extra benchmark coverage suggests it is not entirely without merit, especially in environments where Vulkan is the target API. Given that both are end-of-life products, the decision hinges on whether the user prioritizes raw OpenCL performance (GT 1010) or recorded Vulkan compatibility (Quadro M500M).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architecture generations and foundries. The GeForce GT 1010 uses the GP108 chip built on Pascal architecture, fabricated by Samsung on a 14 nm process. It integrates 1,800 million transistors on a die size of 74 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 24.3 million per square millimeter. The Quadro M500M, in contrast, uses the GM108S chip based on the older Maxwell architecture, built by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 1,020 million transistors into a slightly larger die of 77 mm², yielding a much lower transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. This process advantage gives the GT 1010 a denser, more modern implementation.

Memory subsystems also differ significantly. Both cards have 2 GB of VRAM and a 64-bit bus width, but the GT 1010 uses GDDR5 memory with an effective speed of 6 Gbps and a bandwidth of 48.06 GB/s. The Quadro M500M uses DDR3 memory with an effective speed of 1800 Mbps and a bandwidth of only 14.40 GB/s. This is a 3.3x advantage in memory bandwidth for the GT 1010, which directly impacts compute-heavy workloads. Clock speeds favor the GT 1010 as well, with a base of 1228 MHz and boost of 1468 MHz, versus 1029 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost for the Quadro.

The compute unit configurations differ in an interesting way. The Quadro M500M has more shading units, 384 versus 256 for the GT 1010. However, the GT 1010 counters with higher clocks and memory bandwidth. Both have 16 texture mapping units and 8 render output units. The GT 1010 achieves a pixel rate of 11.74 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.49 GTexel/s, while the Quadro manages 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s respectively. In raw FP32 throughput, the Quadro actually edges ahead at 863.2 GFLOPS versus 751.6 GFLOPS for the GT 1010, a 14.8% advantage despite the older architecture. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, and neither reports FP16 performance.

API support shows a subtle difference. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the GT 1010 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) while the Quadro M500M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). The GT 1010 uses a PCIe 3.0 x4 bus interface, while the Quadro uses an MXM-A (3.0) module interface, reflecting its mobile workstation heritage. The GT 1010 has display outputs of 1x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 2.0, whereas the Quadro's outputs are portable-device dependent. The GT 1010 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the Quadro is an MXM module with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed. Both are rated at 30 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the GeForce GT 1010 scores 6698, while the Quadro M500M scores 5986. The GT 1010 wins by 11.9%. This is the only shared benchmark, so it defines the direct comparison. The GT 1010's score places it at the 38th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro sits at the 32nd percentile. The 11.9% delta is significant, translating to a clear performance tier separation. The GT 1010 also holds its own against its nearest rivals in the database: it trails the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6764) by only 1%, leads the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6612) by 1.3%, leads the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6581) by 1.8%, and trails the AMD FirePro M5100 (6830) by 1.9%. The Quadro M500M, on the other hand, leads its nearest rivals: it beats the AMD FirePro M4000 (5537) by 1.2%, trails the AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5691) by 1.5%, beats the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508) by 1.7%, and beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501) by 1.9%. The GT 1010's average benchmark score is 6698, while the Quadro's average is 5604, reflecting the GT 1010's higher single-score performance and the Quadro's lower Vulkan score dragging down its average. The GT 1010 wins the head-to-head count by 1 win to 0.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 scores 6698 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 11.9% higher than the Quadro M500M's 5986 in the same test.

Q: Does the Quadro M500M have any benchmark result that the GT 1010 does not?

A: Yes, the Quadro M500M has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5222. The GT 1010 has no recorded Vulkan benchmark in the database.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The GT 1010 has a memory bandwidth of 48.06 GB/s using GDDR5 memory, while the Quadro M500M has 14.40 GB/s using DDR3 memory. Both have 2 GB VRAM and a 64-bit bus width.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Quadro M500M has 384 shading units, while the GT 1010 has 256. However, the GT 1010 achieves higher pixel and texture rates due to higher clocks and memory bandwidth.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The GT 1010 uses a 14 nm Samsung process with 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The Quadro M500M uses a 28 nm TSMC process with 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

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

A: The GT 1010 ranks at the 38th percentile, while the Quadro M500M ranks at the 32nd percentile, indicating the GT 1010 outperforms a larger share of the database.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GT 1010 wins in every direct compute comparison available. It is 11.9% faster in OpenCL, has 3.3x the memory bandwidth, higher base and boost clocks, and a higher pixel rate (11.74 GPixel/s versus 8.992 GPixel/s). It also supports a more recent DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_0) and uses a denser, more efficient 14 nm process. The GT 1010 is the clear choice for OpenCL-accelerated applications, general compute workloads, and any scenario where memory bandwidth is a limiting factor. Its higher percentile ranking (38 versus 32) reinforces its overall performance tier advantage. The GT 1010 also has defined display outputs (1x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 2.0) and a single-slot form factor, making it easier to integrate into a standard desktop system.

The Quadro M500M wins in the domain of recorded Vulkan performance, being the only one of the two with a Vulkan benchmark score (5222). It also has a higher raw FP32 throughput at 863.2 GFLOPS versus 751.6 GFLOPS for the GT 1010, which could matter in compute tasks that are shader-bound rather than bandwidth-bound. The Quadro has more shading units (384 versus 256), which could theoretically benefit workloads that scale with shader count, though the GT 1010's higher clocks and memory bandwidth offset this in practice. The Quadro uses an MXM-A module interface, which is designed for mobile workstations, making it the appropriate choice for systems that require that form factor. Its nearest rival comparisons show it leads the AMD FirePro M4000, NVIDIA GeForce MX130, and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, indicating it holds a competitive position within its own mobile workstation segment. For users targeting Vulkan specifically, or those constrained to MXM modules, the Quadro M500M is the only option with recorded data supporting those use cases.