NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M

The data presents a stark generational contrast: the GeForce GTX 560 SE, a 2012 desktop card built on Fermi 2.0, faces the Quadro M5000M, a 2015 mobile workstation GPU based on Maxwell 2.0. While both carry NVIDIA branding, their benchmark scores, architectural foundations, and intended use cases diverge dramatically. The head-to-head results show the Quadro M5000M winning the only shared test by a massive margin, yet the story is more nuanced when examining their respective positions within the broader GPU landscape.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the outcome is lopsided. The Quadro M5000M scores 22,920, while the GTX 560 SE manages only 7,171. This represents a deltaPct of -68.7% for the older card, meaning the Quadro delivers roughly 3.2 times the raw compute performance in this workload. The magnitude of this gap reflects not just architectural evolution but also the sheer resource disparity between the two—the Quadro packs 1,536 shading units against the GTX 560 SE's 288, and its FP32 throughput of 3.229 TFLOPS dwarfs the 847.9 GFLOPS of the Fermi card.

Interestingly, the GTX 560 SE's OpenCL score of 7,171 places it in a tight cluster of near-contemporaries. The data shows it sits virtually tied with the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 at 7,170 (0% delta), and within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 (7,222). This suggests that despite its age, the GTX 560 SE holds its own against integrated and entry-level discrete solutions from its era. Meanwhile, the Quadro M5000M's OpenCL score of 22,920 stands far above its own average benchmark score of 6,481, indicating that OpenCL workloads play to its strengths in a way that other tests do not.

The Quadro M5000M also has additional benchmark data beyond OpenCL. In Vulkan, it scores 24,875, further confirming its compute prowess. However, its PassMark results tell a different story: DirectX 9 yields 119, DirectX 10 scores 35, DirectX 11 reaches 54, and DirectX 12 drops to 29. The G3D score of 7,062 and GPU compute score of 2,756 show a capable but not dominant performer in traditional gaming-oriented benchmarks. The G2D score of 476 indicates modest 2D performance. These figures paint a picture of a card optimized for professional compute workloads rather than gaming rasterization.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro M5000M wins the only head-to-head benchmark decisively, but its broader benchmark suite reveals specific strengths. In OpenCL and Vulkan—both compute-oriented APIs—the Quadro excels, with scores of 22,920 and 24,875 respectively. This aligns with its professional workstation positioning, where compute tasks like rendering, simulation, and data processing are paramount. The card's 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth, ample for large datasets typical of professional applications.

The GTX 560 SE, despite losing the head-to-head, shows competitive positioning within its peer group. Its OpenCL score of 7,171 sits within 1% of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (7,203) and the GTX 750 (7,222), suggesting that for its generation, it was a solid mid-range performer. The card's 1,024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 91.87 GB/s, which was respectable for 2012. Its 24 ROPs and 48 TMUs, combined with a pixel rate of 8.832 GPixel/s and texture rate of 35.33 GTexel/s, indicate it could handle contemporary games at moderate settings, though the data does not include gaming-specific benchmarks.

Where the GTX 560 SE might "win" is in the context of its era and form factor. It is a dual-slot desktop card with 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI outputs, while the Quadro is an MXM module with portable-device-dependent outputs. For a desktop build in 2012, the GTX 560 SE offered a familiar installation path. The Quadro, by contrast, requires a compatible laptop or mobile workstation chassis. The GTX 560 SE also has a higher TDP at 150 W versus the Quadro's 100 W, which might seem like a disadvantage, but for a desktop card with a 450 W suggested PSU, it was a manageable requirement.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is vast. The GTX 560 SE uses the GF114 chip on a 40 nm TSMC process, with 1,950 million transistors packed into a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The Quadro M5000M employs the GM204 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 5,200 million transistors across a 398 mm² die, achieving a density of 13.1M per mm²—more than double the older card's density. This process shrink and density increase enable the Quadro to house far more compute resources in a similar physical footprint.

The GTX 560 SE is built on Fermi 2.0 architecture, which was NVIDIA's second iteration of the Fermi design. It supports DirectX 12 (11_0), meaning it is technically DirectX 12-compatible but only at the 11_0 feature level, and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan support is listed. The Quadro M5000M, based on Maxwell 2.0, supports DirectX 12 (12_1) with the full feature set, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This gives the Quadro access to modern graphics APIs that the GTX 560 SE cannot leverage.

Memory configurations differ substantially: the GTX 560 SE has 1 GB GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, while the Quadro has 8 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The Quadro's memory clock of 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) yields 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, versus 91.87 GB/s for the GTX 560 SE. The Quadro also has significantly more execution resources: 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, compared to 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs on the GTX 560 SE. The pixel rate of 67.26 GPixel/s and texture rate of 100.9 GTexel/s on the Quadro are 7.6x and 2.9x higher, respectively, than the GTX 560 SE's figures.

Clock speeds also favor the Quadro, with a base of 962 MHz and boost of 1,051 MHz, while the GTX 560 SE's core clocks are not listed. The GTX 560 SE's memory operates at 957 MHz (3.8 Gbps effective). The Quadro's TDP of 100 W is lower than the GTX 560 SE's 150 W, a notable achievement given the Quadro's far greater compute capability—proof of Maxwell's efficiency gains over Fermi.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 560 SE has an average benchmark score of 7,171, while the Quadro M5000M averages 6,481. However, this is misleading because the Quadro's average includes many low PassMark scores, whereas its OpenCL score of 22,920 far exceeds the GTX 560 SE's 7,171 in the shared test.

Q: Why does the Quadro M5000M have a lower percentile rank despite winning the head-to-head?

A: The Quadro M5000M sits at the 37th percentile versus the GTX 560 SE's 39th percentile. This occurs because the Quadro's average score is dragged down by weak PassMark DirectX results (ranging from 29 to 119), while its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are exceptional. The GTX 560 SE only has one benchmark, which is more representative of its overall capability.

Q: Can the GTX 560 SE run modern APIs?

A: The GTX 560 SE supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. The Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, giving it broader compatibility with current software.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The GTX 560 SE has 1,024 MB of GDDR5, while the Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5. The Quadro also has a wider 256-bit memory bus versus 192-bit, resulting in 160.4 GB/s bandwidth compared to 91.87 GB/s.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The Quadro M5000M has a TDP of 100 W, lower than the GTX 560 SE's 150 W, despite delivering significantly higher compute performance. This reflects the efficiency gains of the 28 nm Maxwell architecture over 40 nm Fermi.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life. The GTX 560 SE was released on February 19, 2012, and the Quadro M5000M on August 17, 2015.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE | NVIDIA Quadro M5000M |

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

| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,950 million | 5,200 million |

| Die Size | 332 mm² | 398 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 13.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 962 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1051 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 957 MHz (3.8 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 91.87 GB/s | 160.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 288 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 48 | 96 |

| ROPs | 24 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.832 GPixel/s | 67.26 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 35.33 GTexel/s | 100.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 847.9 GFLOPS | 3.229 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | Not listed |

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

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | Not listed | 1.4 |

| Release Date | February 19, 2012 | August 17, 2015 |

The Verdict

The data points overwhelmingly toward the Quadro M5000M as the superior performer in raw compute, with its OpenCL score of 22,920 being 68.7% higher than the GTX 560 SE's 7,171. Its 8 GB memory capacity, wider bus, and modern API support make it the clear choice for any workload involving large datasets, modern graphics features, or compute-heavy professional tasks. The Quadro's lower TDP despite vastly higher performance also makes it more efficient.

However, the GTX 560 SE is not without merit when viewed in context. Its average benchmark score of 7,171 exceeds the Quadro's 6,481, and its percentile rank of 39 is slightly higher than the Quadro's 37. This suggests that in the broader ecosystem of all GPUs, the GTX 560 SE's single strong OpenCL result positions it comparably to the Quadro, which is dragged down by weak gaming-oriented PassMark scores. For a desktop system from 2012, the GTX 560 SE offered dual-slot cooling, standard PCIe 2.0 x16 connectivity, and familiar DVI outputs.

The choice depends entirely on the use case. Professional users requiring compute performance, large memory buffers, and modern API support should select the Quadro M5000M, provided their system accepts an MXM module. Gamers or desktop builders from the Fermi era who prioritize compatibility with legacy motherboards and connectors might find the GTX 560 SE adequate for older titles, though the data shows it would struggle with modern compute demands. The Quadro's Vulkan 1.4 support and DirectX 12_1 feature level future-proof it in ways the GTX 560 SE cannot match. Ultimately, the benchmark data makes a compelling case that the Quadro M5000M is the more capable and versatile GPU, despite the GTX 560 SE's marginally better aggregate percentile standing.