NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M are two mobile GPUs separated by three years of architecture evolution, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive generational leap. While the GTX 675M holds its own as a capable Fermi-era part, the Quadro M5000M dominates in raw compute, delivering over three times the OpenCL performance. The data shows a clear hierarchy, with the Quadro M5000M positioned as the superior performer in every measurable category, though the GTX 675M's relative standing among its peers is slightly stronger than the Quadro's.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is a landslide. The Quadro M5000M scores 22,920 points, while the GTX 675M manages 6,946 points. This represents a deltaPct of -69.7% for the GTX 675M, meaning the Quadro M5000M is approximately 230% faster in this compute-oriented workload. The sheer magnitude of this difference underscores the architectural gulf between the two: the Quadro M5000M's Maxwell 2.0 design with 1,536 shading units simply overwhelms the GTX 675M's 384 shading units.

Looking at broader benchmark context, the Quadro M5000M also posts scores in other test suites that are not available for the GTX 675M. In Passmark G3D, the Quadro M5000M scores 7,062, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it reaches 24,875. While direct comparisons are impossible without GTX 675M scores in these tests, the Quadro M5000M's average benchmark score of 6,481 across all tests is slightly lower than its OpenCL score alone, indicating that its DirectX and compute performance varies significantly by workload. The GTX 675M's average benchmark score is 6,946, which is actually higher than the Quadro M5000M's average, despite the Quadro's massive OpenCL advantage.

This apparent contradiction is explained by the Quadro M5000M's mixed results in other tests. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 119 and DirectX 11 score of 54 are modest, while its DirectX 12 score drops to just 29. The GTX 675M, with only the Geekbench OpenCL result in the data, does not have comparable Passmark scores, so its average is skewed by that single high-compute result. The head-to-head data, therefore, tells a story of specialization: the Quadro M5000M excels in compute-heavy OpenCL tasks but shows more variable performance in legacy DirectX workloads.

The Verdict

The verdict is unambiguous for compute workloads: the Quadro M5000M wins decisively. Its 22,920 OpenCL score versus the GTX 675M's 6,946 is a 3.3x advantage, making it the clear choice for any application that leverages GPU compute. The data shows the Quadro M5000M also supports Vulkan 1.4, an API the GTX 675M does not expose, further extending its relevance for modern graphics workloads. For users prioritizing raw compute performance, the Quadro M5000M is the only rational pick.

However, the GTX 675M holds a subtle advantage in its relative standing among peers. Its percentileVsAllGpus of 39 is higher than the Quadro M5000M's 37, and its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (deltaPct -0.4%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (-1.1%), and NVIDIA T600 (-1.3%). The Quadro M5000M's nearest rivals, by contrast, include the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile (deltaPct 0.1%), NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (-0.2%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (-0.5%). The GTX 675M trails its closest competitor by only 0.4%, while the Quadro M5000M actually leads its nearest rival by 0.1%, yet the Quadro's average score of 6,481 is lower than the GTX 675M's 6,946.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice depends on workload. The Quadro M5000M is the compute powerhouse, ideal for OpenCL-heavy tasks, 3D rendering, or scientific simulations. The GTX 675M, while older and slower in absolute terms, posts a higher average benchmark score and a better percentile ranking, suggesting it performs more consistently across a broader range of tasks. The data does not support a universal winner; it supports the Quadro M5000M for compute and the GTX 675M for balanced legacy performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip built on Fermi 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,950 million transistors into a 332 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Quadro M5000M, in contrast, uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a more advanced 28 nm process, also at TSMC. This newer node allows 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, a density of 13.1 million transistors per square millimeter—more than double the GTX 675M's density.

The compute resources differ by a factor of four in shading units: the GTX 675M has 384, while the Quadro M5000M has 1,536. Texture mapping units jump from 64 to 96, and ROPs double from 32 to 64. Clock speeds also favor the Quadro M5000M, with a base clock of 962 MHz and boost of 1,051 MHz, while the GTX 675M's base and boost clocks are not listed in the data. The memory subsystem shows similar generational gains: the GTX 675M offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective), yielding 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro M5000M provides 8 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus but at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), for 160.4 GB/s—a 67% bandwidth improvement.

Feature support also diverges. The GTX 675M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan. The Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use MXM-B (3.0) bus interfaces and MXM Module slot widths, with no power connectors required. Both are end-of-life products, with the GTX 675M released in March 2012 and the Quadro M5000M in August 2015. The GTX 675M's predecessor is GeForce 500M and successor GeForce 700M; the Quadro M5000M's predecessor is Quadro Kepler-M and successor Quadro Pascal-M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The Quadro M5000M is overwhelmingly faster, scoring 22,920 versus the GTX 675M's 6,946 in Geekbench OpenCL, a deltaPct of -69.7% for the GTX 675M.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 675M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the Quadro M5000M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a newer feature level.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5, while the Quadro M5000M has 8 GB of GDDR5, both on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The Quadro M5000M has 13.1 million transistors per mm², compared to the GTX 675M's 5.9 million per mm², due to its smaller 28 nm process versus 40 nm.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life, with the GTX 675M released in March 2012 and the Quadro M5000M in August 2015.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: Only the Quadro M5000M supports Vulkan, with version 1.4 support. The GTX 675M has no Vulkan support listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro M5000M wins in every head-to-head benchmark category where data exists. Its OpenCL score is 3.3x higher, and it offers Vulkan support, 4x the memory, 67% more bandwidth, and 4x the shading units. It is the definitive choice for compute-intensive applications, modern API workloads, and large datasets. The data also shows its Passmark G3D score of 7,062 and GPU compute score of 2,756, indicating strong general 3D performance.

The GTX 675M wins in the context of its peer group. Its percentileVsAllGpus of 39 exceeds the Quadro M5000M's 37, and its average benchmark score of 6,946 is higher than the Quadro's 6,481. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R5 M240, is only 0.4% behind, while the Quadro M5000M actually leads its closest rival, the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile, by 0.1%. For legacy DirectX workloads, the GTX 675M's simpler architecture may be more consistent, though no direct comparison data exists for those tests. The GTX 675M also has a lower transistor count (1,950 million versus 5,200 million) and smaller die (332 mm² versus 398 mm²), which could imply lower manufacturing complexity, though both consume the same 100 W TDP.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification. The GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip on Fermi 2.0 architecture, while the Quadro M5000M uses GM204 on Maxwell 2.0. Process nodes differ: 40 nm versus 28 nm. Transistors: 1,950 million versus 5,200 million. Die size: 332 mm² versus 398 mm². Transistor density: 5.9M per mm² versus 13.1M per mm².

Clocks show the Quadro M5000M with a base of 962 MHz and boost of 1,051 MHz, while the GTX 675M has no base or boost clocks listed; memory clocks are 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) versus 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). Memory size is 2 GB versus 8 GB, with bandwidth at 96.00 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s. Shading units: 384 versus 1,536. TMUs: 64 versus 96. ROPs: 32 versus 64.

Pixel rate is 9.920 GPixel/s versus 67.26 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 39.68 GTexel/s versus 100.9 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 952.3 GFLOPS versus 3.229 TFLOPS. Both have 100 W TDP, MXM Module slot width, no power connectors, MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. API support differs: DirectX 12 (11_0) versus 12 (12_1), both OpenGL 4.6, but only the Quadro M5000M supports Vulkan 1.4. Release dates are March 2012 versus August 2015, with different predecessor and successor lines.