NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M and NVIDIA Quadro K5100M are two Kepler-based mobile GPUs that share the same fundamental silicon but are tuned for different purposes. Benchmark data shows the GTX 780M is the outright performance winner in both available tests, with a decisive 8.5% lead in OpenCL compute and a razor-thin margin in Metal. The Quadro K5100M counters with double the memory capacity and a lower power envelope, making it the more capacity-focused option. This head-to-head is not a close contest in raw speed; it is a choice between an 8.5% performance advantage and an 8 GB frame buffer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The GeForce GTX 780M takes a clean sweep of the two benchmark tests recorded in the data, winning both head-to-head matchups. The most substantial victory comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 780M scores 12,769 against the Quadro K5100M’s 11,771, an 8.5% delta. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any test and highlights a meaningful compute advantage for the consumer part. In Geekbench Metal, the difference nearly evaporates: the GTX 780M scores 8,319 versus 8,315 for the Quadro K5100M, a delta of 0% that effectively makes them identical in this workload. The data records the GTX 780M as the winner in both cases, giving it 2 wins and the Quadro 0 wins.

The 8.5% OpenCL lead is consistent with the underlying clock and fillrate specifications. The GTX 780M runs a base clock of 771 MHz and a boost clock of 797 MHz, while the Quadro K5100M is locked to a flat 771 MHz with no boost. That boost advantage translates directly to a higher pixel rate of 25.50 GPixel/s versus 24.67 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 102.0 GTexel/s versus 98.69 GTexel/s. The GTX 780M also posts higher FP32 compute at 2.448 TFLOPS compared to 2.369 TFLOPS. Every throughput metric in the fact pack favors the GTX 780M, which explains why the OpenCL gap is substantial while the Metal test, which may be less sensitive to these differences, lands at parity.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the GTX 780M pulls ahead, though the Quadro K5100M compensates with capacity. The GTX 780M uses 1250 MHz memory (5 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus, yielding 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K5100M uses slower 900 MHz memory (3.6 Gbps effective) on the same 256-bit bus, producing only 115.2 GB/s — a 44.8 GB/s deficit. However, the Quadro doubles the memory size to 8 GB versus 4 GB. This trade-off means the GTX 780M will feed its shaders faster, while the Quadro can hold larger datasets locally. For compute workloads that fit in 4 GB, the GTX 780M’s bandwidth advantage will be felt; for workloads exceeding 4 GB, the Quadro has a structural edge that no clock speed can overcome.

The average benchmark score reinforces the GTX 780M’s position. Its average across all recorded tests is 11,261, placing it in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. The Quadro K5100M averages 10,043, sitting in the 48th percentile. That 1,218-point average gap is a compressed view of the OpenCL disparity, diluted by the near-tie in Metal. The GTX 780M’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 (average 11,228, just 0.3% behind) and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q (average 11,088, 1.6% behind). The Quadro K5100M’s nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R9 M375 (average 10,070, 0.3% ahead) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M (average 9,959, 0.8% behind). The GTX 780M is competing in a slightly higher performance tier, while the Quadro sits just below it.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M is the faster GPU. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, posts a higher average score (11,261 versus 10,043), and holds a higher percentile ranking (50th versus 48th). Anyone prioritizing raw compute or graphics throughput should choose the GTX 780M. The 8.5% OpenCL lead is the single biggest differentiator in this comparison, and it is backed by superior clock speeds, fillrates, and memory bandwidth. There is no benchmark in the fact pack where the Quadro K5100M wins.

The Quadro K5100M is not without its merits, but they are not performance merits. Its 8 GB memory capacity is double the GTX 780M’s 4 GB, and its TDP is lower at 100 W versus 122 W. For a mobile workstation where power draw and memory capacity are critical constraints, the Quadro is the more practical choice. However, the benchmark data shows no scenario where the Quadro’s extra memory translates into a benchmark victory — likely because the recorded tests (Metal and OpenCL) are not memory-capacity bound. The Quadro’s nearest rival is the GTX 870M (0.8% behind), which is itself a close relative of the GTX 780M, further confirming that this is a mid-tier mobile part.

For the buyer who wants the fastest possible frame rates and compute performance in a laptop, the GTX 780M is the clear pick. For the buyer who needs to load large models or datasets into VRAM and can tolerate a 22 W higher power draw, the Quadro K5100M offers a capacity advantage that the GTX 780M cannot match. The verdict is not close in speed, but it is a genuine fork in the road for specific use cases.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M wins with a score of 12,769 versus 11,771 for the Quadro K5100M, a delta of 8.5%.

Q: How close is the Geekbench Metal score between the two?

A: The GTX 780M scores 8,319 and the Quadro K5100M scores 8,315, a difference of 0% — effectively a tie.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Quadro K5100M has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 780M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory — the Quadro has double the capacity.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 780M has 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth compared to 115.2 GB/s for the Quadro K5100M, a difference of 44.8 GB/s in favor of the GTX 780M.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 780M averages 11,261 across all tests, placing in the 50th percentile. The Quadro K5100M averages 10,043, placing in the 48th percentile.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same architecture?

A: Yes, both are based on the GK104 chip using the Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 3,540 million transistors.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs share a core configuration but diverge on clocks, memory, and power. Both have 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, built on the same GK104 chip. The base clock is identical at 771 MHz, but the GTX 780M boosts to 797 MHz while the Quadro K5100M remains at 771 MHz. Memory clocks differ significantly: the GTX 780M uses 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) for the Quadro. This yields a bandwidth gap of 160.0 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s. Memory size is the biggest spec difference: 4 GB for the GTX 780M, 8 GB for the Quadro K5100M. Pixel rate is 25.50 GPixel/s for the GTX 780M and 24.67 GPixel/s for the Quadro. Texture rate is 102.0 GTexel/s versus 98.69 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.448 TFLOPS against 2.369 TFLOPS. The TDP also differs: 122 W for the GTX 780M, 100 W for the Quadro K5100M. Both use MXM Module slot width, have no power connectors, and use the MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. Both are end-of-life products, with the GTX 780M released on 2013-05-10 and the Quadro K5100M on 2013-07-22.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are architecturally identical at the silicon level. They use the same GK104 chip, the same Kepler architecture, and are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The transistor count is exactly 3,540 million, and the die size is exactly 294 mm², giving a transistor density of 12.0M / mm² for both. Neither GPU has RT cores or tensor cores — these are pre-Ray Tracing Kepler parts. The shading unit count, TMU count, and ROP count are all identical at 1536, 128, and 32 respectively. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for both, meaning they rely on the laptop’s display panel. The generations differ: the GTX 780M belongs to the GeForce 700M series, while the Quadro K5100M belongs to the Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) series. Their predecessors and successors also differ — the GTX 780M follows the GeForce 600M and leads to the GeForce 800M, while the Quadro K5100M follows the Quadro Fermi-M and leads to the Quadro Maxwell-M. The core architectural difference is not in the silicon but in the operating parameters: the GTX 780M runs higher clocks and memory speeds, while the Quadro K5100M is configured for lower power consumption and doubled memory capacity. There is no node, cache, or feature-set difference in the fact pack — the two are the same die with different bins and memory configurations.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M wins in every recorded performance benchmark, making it the default choice for compute-heavy and graphics-intensive workloads. Its 8.5% OpenCL advantage and 160.0 GB/s bandwidth make it better suited for general-purpose GPU compute, rendering tasks that are bandwidth-limited, and gaming. The higher boost clock of 797 MHz and texture rate of 102.0 GTexel/s give it an edge in fillrate-bound scenarios. The GTX 780M also holds a higher average score (11,261) and percentile rank (50th), meaning it outperforms a larger share of the GPU population than the Quadro.

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M wins in capacity and efficiency. Its 8 GB memory capacity is double the GTX 780M’s 4 GB, making it the better option for workloads that require large datasets in VRAM — such as big 3D scenes, high-resolution textures, or machine learning inference with larger batch sizes — provided they fit within the lower bandwidth budget. Its 100 W TDP is 22 W lower than the GTX 780M’s 122 W, which can be decisive in thermally constrained laptops or for users prioritizing battery life. The Quadro also carries the professional workstation branding, though the fact pack does not list any ISV certification or driver-specific features. In the absence of a benchmark win, the Quadro’s appeal rests entirely on its memory size and power draw. For users who need to exceed 4 GB of VRAM, the Quadro is the only option; for everyone else, the GTX 780M’s performance lead makes it the rational pick.