GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M represent two distinct interpretations of the Fermi architecture, aimed at different segments of the market. The data shows a single benchmark comparison, but the specifications reveal a deeper story about how each card prioritizes different workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, which measures general-purpose compute performance. In this test, the Quadro 5000 scores 7289, while the GTX 675M scores 6946. This results in a 4.9% victory for the Quadro 5000, making it the clear winner in the sole head-to-head metric. The data records 1 win for the Quadro 5000 and 0 wins for the GTX 675M.

This margin, while not overwhelming, is significant for a few reasons. The Quadro 5000 achieves this lead despite having fewer shading units (352 vs. 384). It compensates with a wider memory bus (320-bit vs. 256-bit), which provides 120.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth compared to the GTX 675M’s 96.00 GB/s. The higher bandwidth is likely a key factor in the OpenCL score, as compute workloads often rely heavily on memory throughput.

Contextualizing the scores, the Quadro 5000 sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, which scores 7222, a mere 0.9% difference. The GTX 675M is just behind, at the 39th percentile, with its closest competitor being the AMD Radeon R5 M240, which scores 6975, a -0.4% difference. The delta between the two cards is small enough that in real-world terms, they are performance neighbors; however, the Quadro 5000 has the definitive edge in this compute test.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the Quadro 5000 the overall win, but the specification sheet suggests distinct strengths for each.

The Quadro 5000 wins in compute performance, as demonstrated by its OpenCL score. Its higher pixel rate (11.29 GPixel/s vs. 9.920 GPixel/s) and higher FP32 throughput (722.3 GFLOPS vs. 952.3 GFLOPS), wait, the latter figure is actually lower. Let’s re-examine: the GTX 675M has higher FP32 throughput at 952.3 GFLOPS and a much higher texture rate (39.68 GTexel/s vs. 22.57 GTexel/s). Yet it still loses the compute benchmark. This paradox highlights that raw theoretical throughput does not always translate to real-world performance, especially in a driver-optimized professional workload like OpenCL. The Quadro 5000’s advantage likely comes from its larger memory bus and bandwidth, which reduces bottlenecks.

The GTX 675M wins on raw shader and texture processing capabilities. With 384 shading units and 64 TMUs, it has more parallel processing units than the Quadro 5000’s 352 shading units and 44 TMUs. This suggests it could excel in tasks that are heavily reliant on pixel shading and texture fetches, such as gaming. Its lower TDP of 100 W also makes it a more power-efficient part, suitable for a mobile MXM module format. However, the data does not include a gaming benchmark, so this advantage is inferred from the specification differences, not a measured win.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 7289 compared to the GTX 675M’s 6946, a 4.9% difference.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Quadro 5000 is 0.9% ahead of the GeForce GTX 750 (score 7222) and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (score 7203). The GTX 675M is 1.7% ahead of the AMD FirePro M5100 (score 6830) but trails the NVIDIA T600 (score 7035) by 1.3%.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The Quadro 5000 has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, yielding 120.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. Neither lists Vulkan support.

Q: What is the difference in physical design?

A: The Quadro 5000 is a dual-slot card, 248 mm long, requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 450 W power supply. The GTX 675M is an MXM Module with no power connectors, designed for portable devices.

Q: What is the production status of these GPUs?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The Quadro 5000 was released earlier, with its predecessor being the Quadro FX Tesla and successor the Quadro Kepler. The GTX 675M’s predecessor is the GeForce 500M and successor is the GeForce 700M.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 5000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Chip | GF100 | GF114 |

| Architecture | Fermi | Fermi 2.0 |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Memory Size | 2.5 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 320 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 120.0 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 352 | 384 |

| TMUs | 44 | 64 |

| ROPs | 40 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.29 GPixel/s | 9.920 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.57 GTexel/s | 39.68 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 722.3 GFLOPS | 952.3 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 152 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | None |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 248 mm (9.8 inches) length | None listed |

| Release Date | 2011-02-22 | 2012-03-21 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,499 USD | None |

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on TSMC’s 40 nm process, but they represent different generations of the Fermi architecture. The Quadro 5000 uses the GF100 chip, which is the original Fermi design. This chip is physically massive, with 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip, described as Fermi 2.0. This is a refined version of the architecture, packing 1,950 million transistors onto a much smaller 332 mm² die. The transistor density is identical for both at 5.9M / mm².

The architectural differences manifest in the core configurations. The Quadro 5000’s GF100 chip emphasizes a wider memory interface and more ROPs (40), which is beneficial for professional workloads that require high fill rates and large data sets. The GTX 675M’s GF114 chip instead focuses on raw compute and texturing, with more shading units (384) and TMUs (64). This makes it a more balanced design for gaming, where geometry and texture detail are paramount. The Quadro 5000 also features a dual-slot cooler and a 6-pin power connector, reflecting its 152 W TDP, while the GTX 675M is a power-efficient 100 W MXM module with no connectors, designed to be integrated into laptops. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 675M’s newer Fermi 2.0 design offers higher FP32 throughput (952.3 GFLOPS) compared to the Quadro 5000 (722.3 GFLOPS).

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if nuanced, picture. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is the overall winner of the head-to-head benchmark, taking a 4.9% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This is the only measured performance metric, and it directly favors the Quadro. Its larger memory bus and bandwidth (120.0 GB/s) and higher pixel rate (11.29 GPixel/s) are likely the deciding factors in this compute test, making it the superior choice for tasks that are memory-bound or require high fill rates. Its professional pedigree is reinforced by its 2,499 USD launch MSRP, dual-slot design, and DisplayPort outputs, indicating it was built for workstation environments.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M should be the pick for scenarios where raw shader throughput and power efficiency are the primary concerns. Despite losing the OpenCL test, its specifications show a clear intent for different workloads. With 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and FP32 performance of 952.3 GFLOPS, it is theoretically stronger at compute-heavy tasks that are not memory-limited. Its 100 W TDP and MXM form factor make it the only viable option for portable systems, while the Quadro 5000’s 152 W TDP and dual-slot cooler require a desktop chassis.

In summary, the benchmark decisively favors the Quadro 5000. However, the GTX 675M is not a weaker card overall; it is a different tool. The Quadro 5000 is for the professional workstation, where precision and memory bandwidth are king. The GTX 675M is for the mobile gamer or content creator, where the balance of shader power and thermal efficiency matters more than the raw OpenCL score. The 4.9% benchmark delta is the final word on compute, but the specification sheets tell you which card is better suited for your specific hardware constraints.