NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M and NVIDIA Quadro M5000M represent two vastly different eras and purposes in mobile graphics. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, yet the underlying specifications reveal a chasm in capability. This analysis breaks down where each GPU wins, the architectural gulf between them, and what the benchmark scores actually imply for potential users.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unequivocal: the Quadro M5000M wins the only direct comparison available. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the M5000M scores 22,920 against the GT 555M’s 6,493, a delta of -71.7% for the older card. This is not a marginal victory; it is a decisive sweep. The wins tally shows 0 for the GeForce GT 555M and 1 for the Quadro M5000M.

However, the use-case split is not merely about raw score supremacy. The GeForce GT 555M, with its 35 W TDP, is positioned for thin-and-light laptops where power draw is the primary constraint. Its performance, while far lower, comes at a fraction of the power budget. The Quadro M5000M, rated at 100 W, is a different class of mobile workstation part. It targets professional applications, 3D rendering, and compute workloads where the 3.229 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is the priority.

The average benchmark scores tell a curious story. The GT 555M averages 6,493, while the M5000M averages 6,481. Despite the M5000M’s massive OpenCL win, its average is pulled down by other benchmarks in its suite, such as the Passmark DirectX 10 score of 35 and DirectX 12 score of 29. The GT 555M only has the single Geekbench OpenCL result in its profile. This discrepancy highlights that the two cards are tested under different conditions, and the average scores place both at the 37th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals for both are nearly identical in score, with the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile and Intel UHD Graphics P750 hovering within a 1.1% delta, indicating that in aggregate, these older and newer mobile parts land in a similar performance tier despite their architectural differences.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The GeForce GT 555M is built on the Fermi architecture, using the GF106 chip fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 4.9M per mm². The Quadro M5000M, in contrast, uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip on a 28 nm process, also from TSMC. This newer process allows for 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, a transistor density of 13.1M per mm². The M5000M is not just a bigger chip; it is a denser one, indicating a fundamental leap in design efficiency.

Core counts reflect this disparity. The GT 555M has 144 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The M5000M scales this up dramatically with 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This is a 10.67x increase in shading units, a 4x increase in TMUs, and a 4x increase in ROPs. The memory subsystem is equally divergent. The GT 555M uses 1,024 MB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 160.4 GB/s. That is a 5.57x bandwidth advantage, which is critical for texture-heavy workloads and large datasets.

Clock behavior also differs. The GT 555M has no listed base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 900 MHz, translating to 1800 Mbps effective. The M5000M has a base clock of 962 MHz and a boost clock of 1051 MHz, with memory at 1253 MHz, or 5 Gbps effective. The M5000M’s boost capability is a feature absent from the older card’s spec sheet. The bus interface further separates them: the GT 555M uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the M5000M uses MXM-B (3.0), a module standard that allows for higher power delivery and better cooling in workstation laptops. The M5000M is also explicitly a "MXM Module" in slot width, whereas the GT 555M has no such designation. The M5000M supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GT 555M only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan listing. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Quadro M5000M scores 22,920, while the GeForce GT 555M scores 6,493. This is a 71.7% difference, meaning the M5000M delivers roughly 3.5 times the OpenCL compute performance. This is a massive margin that reflects the core count and memory bandwidth advantages discussed above. OpenCL is a proxy for general-purpose GPU compute, so this result indicates the M5000M is far more capable for tasks like physics simulation, image processing, or any workload that can leverage the GPU beyond graphics.

Looking at the M5000M’s broader benchmark suite provides context. Its Passmark G3D score is 7,062, while its Passmark G2D score is 476. The DirectX 9 score is 119, but the DirectX 10 score drops to 35, and DirectX 11 is 54, with DirectX 12 at 29. These scores suggest that the M5000M’s raw graphics performance is strong in legacy APIs but less impressive in newer ones, possibly due to driver maturity or architecture specialization. The Passmark GPU Compute score is 2,756, which is respectable but far below the OpenCL score, indicating the test methodology varies significantly. The GT 555M has no such additional benchmarks, so the data cannot directly compare their rasterization performance. The only head-to-head is the OpenCL test, and the result is a clear win for the M5000M.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M is the superior performer in compute tasks. Its 22,920 OpenCL score dwarfs the GT 555M’s 6,493, and its specifications—1,536 shading units, 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, and 3.229 TFLOPS FP32—position it for demanding professional workloads. The 8 GB GDDR5 memory is another significant advantage, allowing for larger textures and datasets than the GT 555M’s 1 GB DDR3. For anyone running OpenCL-heavy applications, 3D rendering, or CAD software, the M5000M is the clear choice.

The GeForce GT 555M, however, is not without its niche. Its 35 W TDP is less than half of the M5000M’s 100 W, making it suitable for laptops that prioritize battery life and portability over raw power. The data shows it holds its own in aggregate scoring, with an average of 6,493 versus the M5000M’s 6,481, and it sits at the same 37th percentile. This suggests that for lighter tasks, the GT 555M is not embarrassingly behind in the broader landscape of mobile GPUs. It is a legacy part, end-of-life since its 2011 release, whereas the M5000M, released in 2015, is also end-of-life but represents a later generation. The choice, strictly from the data, is simple: pick the M5000M for compute performance and memory capacity; pick the GT 555M only if power consumption is the absolute priority and workload demands are minimal.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000M scores 22,920 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M’s 6,493, a delta of -71.7% for the older card.

Q: What are the memory configurations of the two GPUs?

A: The GeForce GT 555M has 1,024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The GeForce GT 555M has 144 shading units, while the Quadro M5000M has 1,536 shading units, a 10.67x difference.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The GeForce GT 555M is rated at 35 W, while the Quadro M5000M is rated at 100 W, making the M5000M significantly more power-hungry.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GeForce GT 555M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The M5000M also supports Vulkan 1.4, which the GT 555M does not list.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each GPU?

A: The GeForce GT 555M has an average benchmark score of 6,493, and the Quadro M5000M has an average of 6,481. Both are at the 37th percentile among all GPUs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M | NVIDIA Quadro M5000M |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Chip | GF106 | GM204 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | 5,200 million |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | 398 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 4.9M / mm² | 13.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | None listed | 962 MHz |

| Boost Clock | None listed | 1051 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective | 1253 MHz / 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 160.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 144 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 24 | 96 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 3.540 GPixel/s | 67.26 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 14.16 GTexel/s | 100.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 339.8 GFLOPS | 3.229 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 35 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | None listed | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2011-07-01 | 2015-08-17 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 400M | Quadro Kepler-M |

| Successor | GeForce 600M | Quadro Pascal-M |