NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M is a legacy mobile workstation part from the Kepler era, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is a desktop Pascal powerhouse. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, but the architectural and feature differences explain exactly where each card still holds relevance. This analysis focuses strictly on the measurable results and specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share only two directly comparable benchmark results, and in both, the GTX 1070 dominates. In the Geekbench Metal test, the Quadro K5100M scores 8,315 points, while the GTX 1070 scores 18,801 points. That is a delta of -55.8% for the Quadro, meaning the GTX 1070 is more than twice as fast in this API. The OpenCL result is even more lopsided: the Quadro scores 11,771, and the GTX 1070 scores 44,700, a delta of -73.7%. The GTX 1070 is roughly 3.8 times faster in raw compute throughput.

These are not marginal wins. The GTX 1070’s advantage in both tests is substantial enough that the Quadro K5100M cannot be considered competitive in any modern compute or graphics workload that uses these APIs. The average benchmark score tells a similar story, though it is less extreme because it includes a broader set of tests. The Quadro’s average is 10,043, and the GTX 1070’s average is 9,780. This is a rare case where the aggregate score favors the older, weaker card. The reason is that the GTX 1070’s average is dragged down by its poor PassMark DirectX 9 and DirectX 12 scores, which sit at 197 and 48 respectively. The Quadro does not have those tests recorded, so its average is based on only two strong OpenCL and Metal results.

When looking at the GTX 1070’s individual benchmark suite, it shows a mixed profile. Its PassMark G3D score is 13,498, and its PassMark GPU Compute score is 6,102. However, its DirectX 12 score of 48 is remarkably low, and its DirectX 10 score of 82 is also weak. Meanwhile, its Geekbench Vulkan score is 22,121, which is excellent. This suggests the GTX 1070 is far better optimized for modern APIs like Vulkan and Metal than for legacy DirectX feature levels. The Quadro K5100M has no Vulkan score recorded, and its DirectX support is capped at 11_0, which explains its absence from DirectX 12 tests.

Architecture Differences

The core architectural gap is generational. The Quadro K5100M uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 1070 uses the GP104 chip on the Pascal architecture, also from TSMC, but on a 16 nm process. The transistor counts reflect this: the Quadro has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the GTX 1070 has 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die. The GTX 1070 packs more than twice the transistors into a slightly larger die, giving it a transistor density of 22.9M per mm² versus the Quadro’s 12.0M per mm².

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The Quadro’s base and boost clocks are both locked at 771 MHz. The GTX 1070 has a base clock of 1,506 MHz and a boost clock of 1,683 MHz. That is roughly double the clock speed, which directly translates into higher throughput. Memory clocks differ as well. The Quadro runs at 900 MHz with 3.6 Gbps effective speed, while the GTX 1070 runs at 2,002 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed. Both cards feature 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, but the GTX 1070’s bandwidth is 256.3 GB/s versus the Quadro’s 115.2 GB/s. That is more than double the memory bandwidth.

The compute units also differ. The Quadro has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 1070 has 1,920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. While the GTX 1070 has fewer TMUs, it makes up for it with far higher clocks and double the ROPs. Pixel rate is 24.67 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 107.7 GPixel/s for the GTX 1070. Texture rate is 98.69 GTexel/s for the Quadro versus 202.0 GTexel/s for the GTX 1070. FP32 performance is 2.369 TFLOPS for the Quadro versus 6.463 TFLOPS for the GTX 1070, a nearly threefold advantage. The GTX 1070 also has FP16 capability at 101.0 GFLOPS (1:64), while the Quadro has no FP16 rating.

The GTX 1070 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The physical form factors are entirely different: the Quadro is an MXM module with no power connectors and a 100 W TDP, while the GTX 1070 is a dual-slot card with a 1x 8-pin connector, a 150 W TDP, and a suggested 450 W PSU. The GTX 1070’s dimensions are 267 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1070 wins in every measurable compute and graphics benchmark where both are tested. Its Geekbench Metal score of 18,801 is 126% higher than the Quadro’s 8,315. Its OpenCL score of 44,700 is 280% higher than the Quadro’s 11,771. For any workload that leverages modern APIs, the GTX 1070 is the clear choice. It also has superior raw specs across the board: higher clocks, more bandwidth, more shading units, more ROPs, and higher FP32 throughput.

The Quadro K5100M’s only advantage lies in its efficiency and form factor. It draws 100 W versus the GTX 1070’s 150 W, and it requires no external power connector, making it suitable for mobile workstations. Its MXM bus interface is designed for laptops and compact systems. The GTX 1070, by contrast, is a desktop-only card with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The Quadro also has a higher average benchmark score of 10,043 versus 9,780, but this is an artifact of the test set rather than a real performance win. The Quadro’s average is based on two strong scores, while the GTX 1070’s average includes weak legacy DirectX tests.

In terms of percentile ranking, the Quadro sits at the 48th percentile of all GPUs, and the GTX 1070 sits at the 47th percentile. These are nearly identical, indicating that despite the GTX 1070’s massive wins in Metal and OpenCL, its overall standing in the database is similar due to the inclusion of those poor DirectX 9 and 12 scores. The GTX 1070’s nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5000 and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M, both within 0.5% of its average score. The Quadro K5100M’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M375 and the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M, both within 0.3% of its average.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 1070 scores 44,700 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 73.7% higher than the Quadro K5100M’s 11,771. This is the largest single-test gap between the two cards.

Q: Are these cards comparable in modern gaming APIs?

A: The GTX 1070 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K5100M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 1070 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 22,121, which the Quadro cannot produce.

Q: Why does the Quadro K5100M have a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Quadro’s average is 10,043 versus the GTX 1070’s 9,780. This is because the GTX 1070’s average includes very low PassMark DirectX 9 (197) and DirectX 12 (48) scores, while the Quadro’s average is based only on its two strong Geekbench results.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 1070 has 256.3 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Quadro K5100M has 115.2 GB/s. Both use 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but the GTX 1070 runs at 8 Gbps effective versus 3.6 Gbps.

Q: Can the Quadro K5100M be used in a desktop PC?

A: No. The Quadro K5100M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and is an MXM module, designed for portable devices. The GTX 1070 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and is a dual-slot desktop card.

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The GTX 1070 has a base clock of 1,506 MHz and a boost clock of 1,683 MHz. The Quadro K5100M is locked at 771 MHz for both base and boost.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The Quadro K5100M uses the GK104 chip on a 28 nm process, while the GTX 1070 uses the GP104 chip on a 16 nm process. Transistor count is 3,540 million versus 7,200 million. Die size is 294 mm² versus 314 mm². Transistor density is 12.0M per mm² versus 22.9M per mm².

Clock speeds: the Quadro runs at 771 MHz base and boost, while the GTX 1070 runs at 1,506 MHz base and 1,683 MHz boost. Memory clock is 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) for the Quadro versus 2,002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1070. Both have 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but bandwidth differs: 115.2 GB/s versus 256.3 GB/s.

Shading units: 1,536 versus 1,920. TMUs: 128 versus 120. ROPs: 32 versus 64. Pixel rate: 24.67 GPixel/s versus 107.7 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 98.69 GTexel/s versus 202.0 GTexel/s. FP32: 2.369 TFLOPS versus 6.463 TFLOPS. The GTX 1070 has FP16 at 101.0 GFLOPS (1:64), while the Quadro has none.

TDP is 100 W for the Quadro versus 150 W for the GTX 1070. Slot width is MXM Module versus Dual-slot. Power connectors: None versus 1x 8-pin. The GTX 1070 suggests a 450 W PSU. Bus interface: MXM-B (3.0) versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions for the GTX 1070 are 267 mm length, 112 mm height, and 40 mm width; the Quadro has no listed dimensions. DirectX support: 12 (11_0) versus 12 (12_1). Vulkan support: 1.2.175 versus 1.4. The GTX 1070 has a launch MSRP of 379 USD, while the Quadro has no listed launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is the superior performer in every direct comparison. Its Metal and OpenCL scores are respectively 126% and 280% higher than the Quadro K5100M’s. Its FP32 throughput is 2.7 times higher, its memory bandwidth is 2.2 times higher, and its pixel rate is 4.4 times higher. For any task that relies on compute, rendering, or modern graphics APIs, the GTX 1070 is the only rational choice.

The Quadro K5100M should only be considered if the physical constraints of an MXM module and 100 W power draw are absolute requirements, such as in a legacy mobile workstation. Its lower TDP and lack of power connectors are its only advantages. Even then, its performance is capped by a 771 MHz clock and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, which puts it at the 48th percentile of all GPUs.

The GTX 1070’s overall percentile ranking of 47th is misleading given its benchmark wins. That ranking is dragged down by anomalously low PassMark DirectX 9 and DirectX 12 scores, which do not reflect its real-world capability in modern workloads. Its Vulkan score of 22,121 and PassMark G3D score of 13,498 paint a far more accurate picture of a capable mid-range desktop card.

For a builder choosing between these two today, the GTX 1070 wins on every performance metric. The Quadro K5100M is a relic of the Kepler generation, suited only for specific portable workstation applications where the GTX 1070 physically cannot fit. If you have the slot and power budget for a desktop card, the GTX 1070 is the definitive pick. If you are stuck with an MXM socket, the Quadro K5100M is the only option of the two, but its performance is firmly in the lower half of the GPU landscape.