NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Comparison

The database pits two very different NVIDIA products against each other here: the GeForce GTX 780 Ti, a flagship gaming card from the Kepler era, and the Quadro RTX 5000, a Turing-based workstation board. Despite the GTX 780 Ti launching first with the higher launch MSRP of the two generations apart, the recorded data shows the Quadro RTX 5000 sweeping every shared benchmark, and the gap is not close. What follows is a step-by-step walk through the measurements, the silicon behind them, and where each card still makes sense.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two tests appear in both records, and the Quadro RTX 5000 won both, giving it a clean sweep with two wins to zero for the GTX 780 Ti.

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the narrower of the two, and it is still a blowout. The Quadro RTX 5000 posted 78999 against 27326 for the GTX 780 Ti, a gap of 65.4 percent in the workstation card's favor. OpenCL measures general GPU compute, and a lead of that magnitude reflects the raw architectural advantage at work: more than double the FP32 throughput, a far newer instruction set, and dedicated hardware the Kepler card simply does not have.

Geekbench Vulkan is worse for the older card. Here the Quadro RTX 5000 scored 92309 while the GTX 780 Ti managed 27238, a 70.5 percent deficit. Vulkan support itself is instructive: the database lists the GTX 780 Ti at Vulkan 1.2.175 versus 1.4 for the Quadro RTX 5000, so the Kepler board is running an older API feature level even before performance enters the picture.

Context from each card's rival set sharpens the picture. The GTX 780 Ti's average benchmark score of 24236 places it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs in the database, essentially tied with cards like the GeForce GTX 1630 (24277 average, 0.2 percent apart), the RTX 2080 SUPER (24170, 0.3 percent), the Radeon RX 6800S (24063, 0.7 percent), and the RX 6600 XT (24442, 0.8 percent). The Quadro RTX 5000's average of 21629 lands it in the 67th percentile, bracketed by the GTX 1060 6 GB (21856, 1 percent), the RTX A4000 Mobile (21379, 1.2 percent), the Radeon HD 8970M (21237, 1.8 percent), and the RX Vega M GL (21153, 2.3 percent). These percentile averages mix different test suites, which is why the head-to-head numbers and the percentile ranking pull in different directions; on the directly comparable Geekbench tests, the Quadro is in a different class.

The Quadro's individual PassMark results add texture: 15616 in G3D, 6525 in GPU compute, 709 in G2D, plus graphics subsystem scores of 195 for DirectX 9, 140 for DirectX 11, 113 for DirectX 10, and 59 for DirectX 12. The GTX 780 Ti also carries a Geekbench Metal score of 18144 in its record, a test absent from the Quadro entry.

Architecture Differences

The two cards sit five years and several generations apart, and the silicon tells the story.

The GTX 780 Ti is built on the GK110B die, Kepler architecture, GeForce 700 generation, manufactured at TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 7080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, a density of 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 die, Turing architecture, Quadro Turing generation, on TSMC's 12 nm node. It holds 13600 million transistors in a 545 mm² die at 25.0 million per square millimeter, roughly double the density of the Kepler part in a slightly smaller chip.

The execution resources diverge in kind, not just degree. The GTX 780 Ti has 2880 shading units, 240 texture units, and 48 render outputs. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 3072 shading units, 192 texture units, and 64 ROPs. The Kepler card actually leads in TMU count, but its clocks give it away: 875 MHz base and 928 MHz boost versus 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost on the Quadro, nearly double the frequency on both measures. The result is a texture fill rate of 348.5 GTexel/s for the Quadro against 222.7 GTexel/s for the GTX 780 Ti, and a pixel rate of 116.2 GPixel/s against 55.68 GPixel/s.

Compute throughput follows the same pattern. FP32 throughput is 11.15 TFLOPS on the Quadro versus 5.345 TFLOPS on the GTX 780 Ti, and the Turing card adds 22.30 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 rate, a capability the Kepler record does not list at all. The Quadro also carries 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores; the GTX 780 Ti predates both hardware types, with neither listed in its record.

Memory is another generational leap. The GTX 780 Ti pairs 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus running at an effective 7 Gbps, for 336.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus at an effective 14 Gbps, delivering 448.0 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the Quadro moves more data and holds more than five times the capacity.

API support differs meaningfully. The GTX 780 Ti reports DirectX 12 with an 11_1 feature level and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Quadro RTX 5000 lists DirectX 12 Ultimate with a 12_2 feature level and Vulkan 1.4. Both share OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

On the shared benchmarks, the Quadro RTX 5000 wins everywhere, and by enormous margins: 65.4 percent in OpenCL compute and 70.5 percent in Vulkan. There is no recorded test where the GTX 780 Ti comes out ahead. Its 240 texture units are the lone hardware count where it leads, but even that does not translate into a fill-rate win because of the clock deficit.

The Quadro's case rests on compute and modern graphics features. A 78999 OpenCL score and 6525 PassMark GPU compute score, combined with 384 tensor cores and 48 RT cores, mark it as the card for workloads that use those units, alongside its 16 GB frame buffer. Its display configuration, four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs plus a USB Type-C, also targets multi-monitor workstation setups rather than the GTX 780 Ti's two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2.

The GTX 780 Ti's record still shows a competent gaming-class part for its day: a 70th percentile average against the full database, the 18144 Metal score, and FP32 throughput that kept pace with far newer cards in aggregate scoring. But within this pairing, its wins are purely historical.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Quadro RTX 5000 in the shared benchmarks?

A: It scored 78999 versus 27326 in Geekbench OpenCL (65.4 percent ahead) and 92309 versus 27238 in Geekbench Vulkan (70.5 percent ahead). It won both shared tests.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing hardware?

A: No. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores. The GTX 780 Ti lists neither, as Kepler predates both hardware types.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro RTX 5000, at 448.0 GB/s from 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The GTX 780 Ti delivers 336.6 GB/s from 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus.

Q: How do their database percentiles compare?

A: The GTX 780 Ti sits in the 70th percentile with an average score of 24236; the Quadro RTX 5000 sits in the 67th percentile at 21629. The averages draw on different test suites, so the head-to-head Geekbench results are the better direct comparison.

Q: Which card consumes more power?

A: The GTX 780 Ti, at a 250 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU. The Quadro RTX 5000 runs at 230 W with a 550 W suggested PSU. Both use one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector and a dual-slot design.

Q: Are either of these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The GTX 780 Ti launched in November 2013 with a launch MSRP of 699 USD; the Quadro RTX 5000 launched in August 2018 with a launch MSRP of 2299 USD.

Specification Differences

• Chip and architecture: GK110B on Kepler versus TU104 on Turing.
• Generation: GeForce 700 versus Quadro Turing.
• Process node: 28 nm versus 12 nm, both from TSMC.
• Transistors and density: 7080 million at 12.6M per mm² in a 561 mm² die versus 13600 million at 25.0M per mm² in a 545 mm² die.
• Clocks: 875 MHz base and 928 MHz boost versus 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost; memory at an effective 7 Gbps versus 14 Gbps.
• Memory: 3 GB GDDR5, 384-bit, 336.6 GB/s versus 16 GB GDDR6, 256-bit, 448.0 GB/s.
• Shading resources: 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, 48 ROPs versus 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs.
• Accelerators: none listed versus 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores.
• Fill rates and compute: 55.68 GPixel/s, 222.7 GTexel/s, 5.345 TFLOPS FP32 versus 116.2 GPixel/s, 348.5 GTexel/s, 11.15 TFLOPS FP32 plus 22.30 TFLOPS FP16.
• Power: 250 W TDP, 600 W suggested PSU versus 230 W TDP, 550 W suggested PSU.
• API support: DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175 versus DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4.
• Outputs: two DVI, HDMI 1.4a, DisplayPort 1.2 versus four DisplayPort 1.4a and USB Type-C.
• Lineage: predecessor GeForce 600 and successor GeForce 900 versus predecessor Quadro Volta and successor Workstation Ampere.

Shared traits include the PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface, dual-slot width, identical 267 mm board length and 111 mm height, and OpenGL 4.6 support.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity. On every directly comparable measurement the Quadro RTX 5000 dominates: 65.4 percent ahead in OpenCL, 70.5 percent ahead in Vulkan, roughly double the FP32 throughput and pixel rate, higher memory bandwidth, and far greater memory capacity. It also runs cooler on paper, with a 230 W TDP against 250 W, while delivering all of it. Anyone choosing between these two for compute, modern graphics workloads, or anything that touches RT cores and tensor cores should take the Quadro RTX 5000 without hesitation.

The GTX 780 Ti's claim is purely historical. It was a flagship gaming card of its generation, and its database average still ranks in the 70th percentile, fractionally ahead of much newer cards in aggregate scoring, including a 18144 Metal result the Quadro record lacks. For understanding how far GPU architecture moved between 28 nm Kepler and 12 nm Turing, this pairing is a useful reference: the Quadro delivers the sweep, and the older card's only remaining edge is a higher texture unit count and a legacy display output mix built around DVI. Both are end-of-life, so in practice this comparison is an exercise in the database's history rather than a live purchase decision.