NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 vs NVIDIA Quadro K5100M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 are both end-of-life graphics solutions built on a 28 nm TSMC process, but they target fundamentally different workloads. The K5100M is a mobile workstation part from the Quadro Kepler-M line, while the GTX 960 is a desktop consumer card from the GeForce 900 family. Benchmark data from this database shows a clear split: the GTX 960 wins both head-to-head tests, but the K5100M holds its own in average score comparisons against its nearest rivals. The data indicates the GTX 960 is the stronger compute performer, while the K5100M offers a different set of trade-offs centered on memory capacity and form factor.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 960 wins decisively in raw compute benchmarks. In the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 960 scores 18,925 against the K5100M’s 11,771, a 37.8% advantage. This is the largest performance gap between the two parts in any measured test. The GTX 960 also wins the Geekbench Metal test, scoring 8,773 versus 8,315, a 5.2% lead. These results paint a picture of a card that simply processes more data per unit time, which is expected given its higher boost clock of 1,178 MHz compared to the K5100M’s fixed 771 MHz.

The K5100M wins in memory capacity, offering 8 GB of GDDR5 versus the GTX 960’s 2 GB. This is a substantial difference that matters for workloads with large datasets that exceed the GTX 960’s frame buffer. The K5100M also uses a 256-bit memory bus, double the GTX 960’s 128-bit bus, which helps maintain bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s, nearly matching the GTX 960’s 112.2 GB/s despite the GTX 960’s faster 7 Gbps effective memory speed. For tasks that are memory-capacity bound, the K5100M is the only option here.

The K5100M’s MXM module form factor and lack of power connectors make it suitable for portable workstations, while the GTX 960 is a dual-slot desktop card requiring a 1x 6-pin connector and a 300 W power supply. This is a fundamental usage split: the K5100M is designed for integration into laptops, while the GTX 960 is a standalone desktop component. The data does not include a direct comparison of power draw, but the K5100M’s 100 W TDP is lower than the GTX 960’s 120 W, which aligns with its mobile positioning.

Architecture Differences

The K5100M is based on the GK104 chip under the Kepler architecture, while the GTX 960 uses the GM206 chip under Maxwell 2.0. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the transistor counts differ: the K5100M packs 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the GTX 960 has 2,940 million on a 228 mm² die. This gives the K5100M a larger chip with more transistors, but the GTX 960 achieves a higher transistor density at 12.9M per mm² versus 12.0M per mm².

The compute configuration favors the K5100M in raw unit counts. The K5100M has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 960 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the GTX 960 achieves nearly identical FP32 performance: 2.413 TFLOPS versus the K5100M’s 2.369 TFLOPS. This is due to the GTX 960’s much higher boost clock of 1,178 MHz, which compensates for the reduced core count. The K5100M’s texture rate of 98.69 GTexel/s is higher than the GTX 960’s 75.39 GTexel/s, but the GTX 960 wins pixel rate at 37.70 GPixel/s versus 24.67 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The K5100M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the GTX 960 has 2 GB on a 128-bit bus. The K5100M’s memory clock is 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective), while the GTX 960 runs at 1,753 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The effective bandwidths are close: 115.2 GB/s for the K5100M and 112.2 GB/s for the GTX 960. The API support also differs: the K5100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the GTX 960 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 960 has Vulkan 1.4 support versus the K5100M’s Vulkan 1.2.175.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two shared benchmarks in the dataset are Geekbench Metal and Geekbench OpenCL, and the GTX 960 wins both. In Geekbench Metal, the GTX 960 scores 8,773 against the K5100M’s 8,315, a 5.2% advantage. This is a moderate lead, suggesting that the GTX 960’s higher clock speed provides a measurable edge in this API. The K5100M’s larger shading unit count does not overcome the GTX 960’s frequency advantage in this test.

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a much larger gap. The GTX 960 scores 18,925, while the K5100M scores 11,771, giving the GTX 960 a 37.8% lead. This is a substantial difference that highlights the GTX 960’s superior compute throughput in a general-purpose workload. The K5100M’s old Kepler architecture appears to be a significant handicap in OpenCL, even with more shading units on paper.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the K5100M actually has a higher average score of 10,043 across all its tests, compared to the GTX 960’s 9,273. However, this is skewed by the different test suites each card was run through. The K5100M’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M375 with an average score of 10,070, a delta of -0.3%, meaning the K5100M is essentially tied with that card. The GTX 960’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 at 9,294, a delta of -0.2%, also a near tie. The K5100M ranks in the 48th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 960 sits in the 45th percentile, indicating that the K5100M is slightly better positioned relative to the broader GPU landscape.

The Verdict

For compute-heavy workloads, the GTX 960 is the clear choice. Its 37.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and 5.2% lead in Geekbench Metal are decisive. The data shows a card that delivers higher FP32 performance (2.413 TFLOPS versus 2.369 TFLOPS) and higher pixel rate (37.70 GPixel/s versus 24.67 GPixel/s), despite having fewer shading units and TMUs. The GTX 960’s 2 GB of memory is a limitation, but for tasks that fit within that frame buffer, it outperforms the K5100M across the board.

For memory-intensive workloads, the K5100M is the only option. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory is four times the GTX 960’s 2 GB, and the 256-bit bus provides comparable bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s. The K5100M also has a higher texture rate of 98.69 GTexel/s versus 75.39 GTexel/s, which could benefit certain texture-heavy applications. However, the K5100M’s lower clock speed and older Kepler architecture result in significantly lower compute scores.

The choice comes down to usage. The GTX 960 is for desktop users who need raw compute performance and can live with 2 GB of memory. The K5100M is for mobile workstation users who need large memory capacity and a lower power draw (100 W versus 120 W), accepting slower compute performance. The GTX 960 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD, while the K5100M has no listed launch MSRP. The data does not support any other conclusion: the GTX 960 wins on speed, the K5100M wins on capacity and portability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The GTX 960. It scores 18,925 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the K5100M’s 11,771, a 37.8% advantage, and also leads in Geekbench Metal with 8,773 versus 8,315.

Q: Does the K5100M have more memory bandwidth than the GTX 960?

A: Slightly, but not by much. The K5100M has 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the GTX 960 has 112.2 GB/s. The K5100M uses a 256-bit bus, while the GTX 960 uses a 128-bit bus, but the GTX 960’s faster memory clock (7 Gbps effective versus 3.6 Gbps effective) nearly closes the gap.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The K5100M has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 960 has only 2 GB. This is a four-fold difference in capacity, which matters for large datasets.

Q: Which card has a higher clock speed?

A: The GTX 960 has a base clock of 1,127 MHz and a boost clock of 1,178 MHz. The K5100M has a fixed clock of 771 MHz for both base and boost.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The K5100M has a higher average benchmark score of 10,043, while the GTX 960 averages 9,273. However, the GTX 960 was tested on more benchmarks, including a Vulkan test where it scored 9,231 and a 3DMark test where it scored 162.

Q: What are the form factor differences?

A: The K5100M is an MXM module with no power connectors, designed for portable devices. The GTX 960 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 1x 6-pin power connector, a 300 W suggested PSU, and a length of 241 mm (9.5 inches).