NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M vs NVIDIA Quadro M500M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results place the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M500M by a meaningful margin. The GTX 670M scores 6513 points, while the Quadro M500M scores 5986 points, giving the GTX 670M an 8.8% advantage. This is a clear win for the older Fermi-based part, despite the Quadro M500M arriving roughly four years later in the market.

Looking at how each card sits relative to its own peer group, the GTX 670M's OpenCL score of 6513 places it in the 38th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around it: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6493 (a 0.3% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M scores 6481 (a 0.5% delta), and the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile scores 6476 (a 0.6% delta). The only rival that beats it in this group is the Intel UHD Graphics P750, which scores 6554, a 0.6% delta in favor of the Intel part. In practical terms, the GTX 670M is essentially neck-and-neck with these four GPUs, with all deltas within one percentage point.

The Quadro M500M, by contrast, scores 5986 in OpenCL, which drops it to the 32nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals show a wider spread of performance. The AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5537, which is 1.2% behind the Quadro M500M. The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 scores 5508, a 1.7% deficit. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M scores 5501, a 1.9% deficit. On the other side, the AMD Radeon HD 8790M scores 5691, which is 1.5% ahead of the Quadro M500M. So the Quadro M500M is competitive with its immediate rivals, but it sits at a lower absolute performance level than the GTX 670M.

The database also records a Vulkan benchmark for the Quadro M500M, scoring 5222 points, but no comparable Vulkan result exists for the GTX 670M, so no direct comparison can be made there. The GTX 670M has no Vulkan entry at all in the database.

In summary, the head-to-head data is unambiguous: the GTX 670M wins the only shared test by 8.8%, and it also holds a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs (38th versus 32nd). The Quadro M500M's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 5604, which is considerably lower than the GTX 670M's single-score average of 6513, representing a 16.2% gap in favor of the GTX 670M when comparing overall averages.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M is the stronger performer in raw compute tasks. Its OpenCL score of 6513 beats the Quadro M500M's 5986 by 8.8%, and its percentile ranking of 38th versus 32nd confirms that it sits higher in the overall distribution of GPU scores. The GTX 670M also has a higher average benchmark score (6513 versus 5604), reflecting that its single recorded result is substantially better than the Quadro M500M's combined average of OpenCL and Vulkan scores.

The Quadro M500M does have one notable advantage in the data: its Vulkan support. The database lists a Vulkan API version of 1.4 for the Quadro M500M, while the GTX 670M has no Vulkan entry. This matters for software that relies on Vulkan for rendering or compute workloads. Additionally, the Quadro M500M's benchmark profile includes a Vulkan score of 5222, which gives it a second data point that the GTX 670M simply does not have.

The GTX 670M's wins are concentrated in raw OpenCL throughput. The Quadro M500M's wins are in API compatibility and efficiency, though efficiency is not directly measured in the benchmarks provided. The GTX 670M has a 75 W TDP, while the Quadro M500M has a 30 W TDP, so the Quadro part draws significantly less power, but the database does not provide power consumption scores in the benchmark results.

For users prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL applications, the GTX 670M is the clear choice based on the 8.8% lead. For users needing Vulkan support or lower power draw, the Quadro M500M is the only one of the two that offers it. The data does not support a recommendation for the Quadro M500M on performance grounds alone, as it loses the only direct benchmark comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M is built on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, using the GF114 chip, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,950 million transistors into a die size of 332 mm², yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA Quadro M500M, by contrast, uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM108S chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 1,020 million transistors on a much smaller die of 77 mm², giving it a transistor density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter.

The memory subsystems differ substantially. The GTX 670M has 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro M500M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering only 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a major divergence: the GTX 670M has five times the memory bandwidth of the Quadro M500M, which directly impacts texture-heavy and bandwidth-bound workloads.

The compute resources are organized differently. The GTX 670M has 336 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operations units. The Quadro M500M has 384 shading units, but only 16 texture mapping units and 8 raster operations units. Despite having more shading units, the Quadro M500M's lower TMU and ROP counts constrain its pixel and texture throughput. The pixel rate of the Quadro M500M is 8.992 GPixel/s, slightly higher than the GTX 670M's 8.372 GPixel/s. However, the GTX 670M's texture rate of 33.49 GTexel/s is nearly double the Quadro M500M's 17.98 GTexel/s.

In floating-point performance, the Quadro M500M edges ahead in FP32 with 863.2 GFLOPS, compared to the GTX 670M's 803.7 GFLOPS. Neither card records FP16 data. The Quadro M500M also has higher clock speeds, with a base clock of 1029 MHz and a boost clock of 1124 MHz, while the GTX 670M does not have base or boost clock entries in the database. The GTX 670M's memory clock is 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective), while the Quadro M500M's memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), but the GTX 670M's wider bus compensates for its lower per-pin speed.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro M500M additionally supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 670M has no Vulkan listing. Both use MXM modules with no external power connectors, and both have display outputs that are dependent on the portable device they are installed in.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M scores 6513 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 8.8% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro M500M's score of 5986.

Q: Does the Quadro M500M support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the Quadro M500M has a Vulkan API version of 1.4 and records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5222. The GTX 670M has no Vulkan support listed in the database.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 670M has 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth using 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, while the Quadro M500M has 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth using 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The Quadro M500M has a transistor density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter, compared to the GTX 670M's 5.9 million per square millimeter. The Quadro M500M uses a 28 nm process, while the GTX 670M uses a 40 nm process.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The GTX 670M has a TDP of 75 W, while the Quadro M500M has a TDP of 30 W. Both use MXM modules with no external power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 performance?

A: The Quadro M500M delivers 863.2 GFLOPS in FP32, slightly ahead of the GTX 670M's 803.7 GFLOPS.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 670M wins in the shared OpenCL benchmark, with 6513 points versus 5986 points, an 8.8% margin. It also wins in memory bandwidth, offering 72.00 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s, and in texture throughput, at 33.49 GTexel/s versus 17.98 GTexel/s. The GTX 670M's 24 ROPs and 56 TMUs provide a substantial advantage in texture-heavy and fill-rate-bound tasks. Its 192-bit bus and GDDR5 memory are clearly superior for bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

The Quadro M500M wins in several specific areas. It has higher FP32 compute, at 863.2 GFLOPS versus 803.7 GFLOPS, which benefits general-purpose compute workloads that are not bandwidth-limited. It has a slightly higher pixel rate, at 8.992 GPixel/s versus 8.372 GPixel/s, giving it a small edge in pixel-fill operations. It has more shading units (384 versus 336), which theoretically helps in shader-heavy workloads, though the benchmark data does not confirm this advantage in practice. It also has Vulkan 1.4 support, which the GTX 670M lacks entirely, making it the only option for Vulkan-based software. Its 2 GB memory capacity is larger than the GTX 670M's 1536 MB, which can matter for holding larger datasets in VRAM, although its bandwidth is much lower. Finally, its 30 W TDP is less than half of the GTX 670M's 75 W, making it a more power-efficient choice for thermally constrained laptops.

The data also shows a notable difference in benchmark consistency. The Quadro M500M has two recorded benchmark scores (5986 in OpenCL and 5222 in Vulkan), with an average of 5604. The GTX 670M has one recorded score of 6513. The GTX 670M's single score is 16.2% higher than the Quadro M500M's average, reinforcing the GTX 670M's overall performance advantage.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification field. The GTX 670M uses the GF114 chip with a 40 nm process, while the Quadro M500M uses the GM108S chip with a 28 nm process. The GTX 670M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, while the Quadro M500M has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. Transistor density is 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 670M and 13.2M per mm² for the Quadro M500M.

Memory configuration differs completely: the GTX 670M has 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro M500M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) for the GTX 670M and 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the Quadro M500M.

Compute resources differ as well: the GTX 670M has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, while the Quadro M500M has 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 8.372 GPixel/s for the GTX 670M and 8.992 GPixel/s for the Quadro M500M. Texture rate is 33.49 GTexel/s for the GTX 670M and 17.98 GTexel/s for the Quadro M500M. FP32 performance is 803.7 GFLOPS for the GTX 670M and 863.2 GFLOPS for the Quadro M500M.

The GTX 670M has no base or boost clock entries, while the Quadro M500M has a base clock of 1029 MHz and a boost clock of 1124 MHz. TDP is 75 W for the GTX 670M and 30 W for the Quadro M500M. The GTX 670M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the Quadro M500M uses an MXM-A (3.0) interface. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but only the Quadro M500M lists Vulkan 1.4 support. The GTX 670M was released on 2012-03-21, while the Quadro M500M was released on 2016-04-26. The GTX 670M comes from the GeForce 600M generation, while the Quadro M500M comes from the Quadro Maxwell-M generation.