NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 vs NVIDIA Quadro K5000 Comparison

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 decisively outperforms the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 across every shared test. The GTX 1070 wins all three head-to-head comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 9780 compared to the Quadro K5000’s 9637. This performance gap is consistent with the architectural generational leap between the two cards, as the GTX 1070’s Pascal architecture delivers substantially higher raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth than the older Kepler-based Quadro K5000.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic margin appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the GTX 1070 scores 44,700 against the Quadro K5000’s 11,418, a decisive 291.5% advantage. This result indicates that compute-heavy workloads, such as GPGPU acceleration and rendering tasks that leverage OpenCL, will see nearly triple the performance on the GTX 1070. The Quadro K5000’s older Kepler architecture, with its lower clock speeds and reduced shader count, simply cannot compete in raw parallel compute throughput.

In Geekbench Metal, the GTX 1070 again dominates with a score of 18,801 versus 6,324 for the Quadro K5000, representing a 197.3% lead. Metal is Apple’s low-level graphics API, and this result suggests that applications optimized for Metal will run at roughly three times the frame throughput or compute speed on the GTX 1070. The Quadro K5000’s lack of modern API optimizations is evident here, as its Kepler architecture predates significant Metal performance enhancements.

The closest contest is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the GTX 1070 scores 22,121 compared to the Quadro K5000’s 11,169, a 98.1% advantage. While still a near-doubling of performance, this narrower margin reflects Vulkan’s ability to extract more efficiency from older hardware. Nevertheless, the GTX 1070’s superior shader count (1920 vs 1536) and far higher clock speeds (1506 MHz base vs 706 MHz base) ensure it maintains a commanding lead even in this most favorable scenario for the older card.

Across all three tests, the GTX 1070’s wins are not marginal but overwhelming. The data shows a consistent performance ratio of roughly 2x to 3x in favor of the newer card, with no single benchmark where the Quadro K5000 manages to close the gap to within 50%. This is a complete sweep for the GTX 1070, with zero wins for the Quadro K5000.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different generations of NVIDIA GPU design. The GTX 1070 is built on the Pascal architecture using the GP104 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 16 nm process node. This allows for 7,200 million transistors packed into a 314 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 22.9M per mm². In contrast, the Quadro K5000 uses the older Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process. It contains just 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of 12.0M per mm².

Clock speeds tell a stark story. The GTX 1070 operates at a base clock of 1506 MHz with a boost clock of 1683 MHz, while the Quadro K5000 is locked at a flat 706 MHz for both base and boost. This means the GTX 1070 runs at more than double the clock frequency, which directly translates into higher throughput for every shader operation. The memory clocks also differ significantly: the GTX 1070 uses 2002 MHz memory (8 Gbps effective) while the Quadro K5000 runs at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective).

The memory subsystems diverge in capacity and bandwidth. The GTX 1070 ships with 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K5000 has only 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus, yielding 172.8 GB/s. This 48% bandwidth advantage for the GTX 1070 is critical for texture-heavy workloads and large dataset processing.

Compute resources also favor the newer card. The GTX 1070 has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Quadro K5000 has fewer shading units (1536) but more TMUs (128), and significantly fewer ROPs (32). The pixel rate reflects this: the GTX 1070 achieves 107.7 GPixel/s versus the Quadro K5000’s 22.59 GPixel/s. Texture rate is similarly lopsided at 202.0 GTexel/s versus 90.37 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is nearly threefold higher on the GTX 1070 at 6.463 TFLOPS versus 2.169 TFLOPS.

Feature support also differs. The GTX 1070 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K5000 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 1070 also offers FP16 compute at 101.0 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), a feature entirely absent from the Quadro K5000. Connectivity reflects their eras: the GTX 1070 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and outputs 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Quadro K5000 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 with 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance in FP32 operations?

A: The GTX 1070 delivers 6.463 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is nearly three times the Quadro K5000’s 2.169 TFLOPS. This advantage stems from the GTX 1070’s higher clock speeds (1506 MHz vs 706 MHz) and greater shader count (1920 vs 1536).

Q: How do the memory capacities compare?

A: The GTX 1070 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the Quadro K5000 has 4 GB. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the GTX 1070’s higher memory clock (2002 MHz vs 1350 MHz) gives it 256.3 GB/s bandwidth versus 172.8 GB/s for the Quadro K5000.

Q: Is the Quadro K5000 competitive in any benchmark against the GTX 1070?

A: No. In the three shared benchmarks (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), the GTX 1070 wins all of them with margins ranging from 98.1% to 291.5%. The Quadro K5000 has zero wins in head-to-head comparisons.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 1070 has a TDP of 150 W, requires a 450 W suggested PSU, and uses a single 8-pin power connector. The Quadro K5000 has a lower TDP of 122 W, requires a 300 W PSU, and uses a single 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The GTX 1070 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 1070’s higher API versions enable better feature utilization in modern applications.

Q: How do the cards compare in terms of physical dimensions?

A: Both cards are 267 mm (10.5 inches) long and approximately 112 mm (4.4 inches) high, making them dual-slot designs. The GTX 1070 is 40 mm (1.6 inches) wide, while the Quadro K5000’s width is not specified.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion: the GTX 1070 is the superior performer in every measurable category. Its average benchmark score of 9780 places it in the 47th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro K5000’s 9637 score sits at the 46th percentile. While these percentiles are close, the head-to-head results reveal the true magnitude of the gap—the GTX 1070 outperforms the Quadro K5000 by 197.3% in Metal, 291.5% in OpenCL, and 98.1% in Vulkan.

For any workload that relies on compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or modern API support, the GTX 1070 is the clear choice. Its 8 GB of memory doubles the Quadro K5000’s 4 GB capacity, and its 256.3 GB/s bandwidth is nearly 50% higher. The GTX 1070 also offers a modern feature set, including DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4 support, which the Quadro K5000 cannot match.

The Quadro K5000’s only advantages are its lower TDP (122 W vs 150 W) and lower PSU requirement (300 W vs 450 W). However, these power savings come at the cost of 60% less FP32 performance (2.169 TFLOPS vs 6.463 TFLOPS) and a significantly older architecture that lacks modern API optimizations. For professional workloads that might have favored the Quadro line’s certification, the benchmark data shows no performance benefit to offset the architectural disadvantages.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000 |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 314 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Base Clock | 1506 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1683 MHz | 706 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Clock | 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) | 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.3 GB/s | 172.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1920 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 120 | 128 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 107.7 GPixel/s | 22.59 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 202.0 GTexel/s | 90.37 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 6.463 TFLOPS | 2.169 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 122 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1070 wins across all compute and graphics performance categories. Its 291.5% lead in Geekbench OpenCL makes it the clear choice for GPGPU workloads, scientific computing, and any application that offloads parallel tasks to the GPU. The 197.3% advantage in Geekbench Metal positions it strongly for Apple ecosystem applications and Metal-optimized rendering. The 98.1% margin in Geekbench Vulkan ensures it handles modern cross-platform games and Vulkan-based professional applications with ease.

The Quadro K5000’s only wins are in power efficiency. Its 122 W TDP is 28 W lower than the GTX 1070’s 150 W, and its 300 W suggested PSU requirement is 150 W lower. For systems with strict power budgets or small form factor PSUs, the Quadro K5000 offers a lower-power alternative, though this comes with a massive performance penalty. The Quadro K5000 also uses a single 6-pin connector versus the GTX 1070’s 8-pin, which could matter for older power supplies lacking 8-pin connectors.

In memory capacity, the GTX 1070’s 8 GB doubles the Quadro K5000’s 4 GB, making it the only viable option for large textures, high-resolution datasets, or multi-monitor setups that require significant frame buffer. The GTX 1070’s newer PCIe 3.0 interface also provides twice the bandwidth of the Quadro K5000’s PCIe 2.0, reducing data transfer bottlenecks for GPU-accelerated storage or compute workloads. For any user prioritizing performance, modern API support, or memory capacity, the GTX 1070 is the definitive choice based on the benchmark data.