NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER vs NVIDIA Quadro K5200 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along generational lines. The NVIDIA Quadro K5200 does not record a single win in the available head-to-head tests, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER takes both. That is not a close contest; it is a gap that spans multiple performance tiers.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 2060 SUPER scores 76,957 against the K5200’s 19,024. The delta is -75.3% from the perspective of the older card, meaning the RTX 2060 SUPER delivers roughly four times the compute throughput. The Geekbench Vulkan result tells the same story: 77,402 versus 20,180, a -73.9% delta. If the workload is compute-heavy or leverages modern graphics APIs, the RTX 2060 SUPER is the only rational choice.

The K5200’s role, however, is not entirely obsolete. Its average benchmark score of 19,602 places it at the 64th percentile of all GPUs, which is actually two points higher than the RTX 2060 SUPER’s 62nd percentile despite the latter’s far higher raw scores. That percentile inversion occurs because the K5200 sits among a cluster of cards with similar average scores—its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro D300 (19,637, -0.2%), the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765, -0.8%), and even the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19,410, +1%). The RTX 2060 SUPER, by contrast, competes in a denser field where its 18,093 average score places it within 1.6% of the Intel Arc A770M and 1.5% of the AMD Radeon RX 460.

For professional visualization workloads that rely on OpenGL or legacy compute paths, the K5200’s Kepler architecture retains a niche. For anything involving DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, or ray tracing, the RTX 2060 SUPER wins outright. The data does not support a scenario where the K5200 is preferable for modern gaming or general-purpose compute.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different manufacturing generations and design philosophies. The K5200 uses the GK110B chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, packing 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The RTX 2060 SUPER uses the TU106 chip on a 12 nm TSMC process, with 10,800 million transistors on a smaller 445 mm² die, achieving 24.3 million transistors per square millimeter—nearly double the density.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The K5200 runs at a 667 MHz base and 771 MHz boost, while the RTX 2060 SUPER operates at 1,470 MHz base and 1,650 MHz boost. The newer card’s clocks are more than twice as high, which partially explains its compute advantage. The K5200’s memory clock is 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) on GDDR5, whereas the RTX 2060 SUPER runs 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on GDDR6. Both use a 256-bit bus, but the RTX 2060 SUPER’s bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s more than doubles the K5200’s 192.3 GB/s.

Shading unit counts favor the older card slightly: 2,304 versus 2,176. The K5200 also has more texture mapping units (192 versus 136) but fewer ROPs (48 versus 64). Those raw counts do not translate into performance, as the RTX 2060 SUPER’s pixel rate of 105.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 224.4 GTexel/s dwarf the K5200’s 37.01 GPixel/s and 148.0 GTexel/s.

The RTX 2060 SUPER adds dedicated hardware the K5200 lacks entirely: 34 ray tracing cores and 272 tensor cores. Its FP32 throughput is 7.181 TFLOPS versus 3.553 TFLOPS, and it also exposes FP16 compute at 14.36 TFLOPS (2:1), a capability the K5200 does not list. API support differs as well: the K5200 maxes out at DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the RTX 2060 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The K5200 averages 19,602 across its two recorded benchmarks, while the RTX 2060 SUPER averages 18,093 across ten benchmarks. However, the RTX 2060 SUPER’s raw scores in shared tests are far higher.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER scores 76,957, which is 75.3% higher than the K5200’s 19,024. The RTX 2060 SUPER wins that test outright.

Q: Does the K5200 have any advantage in raw shading unit count?

A: Yes, the K5200 has 2,304 shading units versus 2,176 on the RTX 2060 SUPER. This does not translate into a performance win, as the RTX 2060 SUPER’s higher clocks and newer architecture dominate all benchmark results.

Q: What memory type and bandwidth does each card use?

A: The K5200 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 2060 SUPER also has 8 GB, but it is GDDR6 with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: Only the RTX 2060 SUPER, which includes 34 ray tracing cores. The K5200 has no RT cores listed.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the RTX 2060 SUPER?

A: The RTX 2060 SUPER had a launch MSRP of 399 USD. The K5200 has no launch MSRP listed.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA Quadro K5200 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GK110B | TU106 |

| Architecture | Kepler | Turing |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 10,800 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 445 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 24.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 667 MHz | 1470 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 771 MHz | 1650 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.3 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 2176 |

| TMUs | 192 | 136 |

| ROPs | 48 | 64 |

| RT Cores | None | 34 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 272 |

| Pixel Rate | 37.01 GPixel/s | 105.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 148.0 GTexel/s | 224.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.553 TFLOPS | 7.181 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 14.36 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 175 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 229 mm (9 inches) |

| Release Date | 2014-07-21 | 2019-07-08 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two shared tests expose a chasm in compute capability. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 2060 SUPER posts 76,957 against the K5200’s 19,024. The -75.3% delta means the RTX 2060 SUPER is not merely faster; it is in a different performance class. OpenCL workloads that stress the GPU as a general-purpose processor will finish roughly four times faster on the newer card.

Geekbench Vulkan follows the same pattern. The RTX 2060 SUPER scores 77,402, while the K5200 manages 20,180. The -73.9% delta is slightly narrower than the OpenCL gap but still represents a decisive victory. Vulkan is a modern low-level API, and the K5200’s support for version 1.2.175 appears to limit its ability to take advantage of the test’s full feature set. The RTX 2060 SUPER’s Vulkan 1.4 support aligns with the benchmark’s requirements.

Beyond the shared tests, the RTX 2060 SUPER has a broader benchmark portfolio. Its PassMark G3D score is 16,462, and its PassMark GPU Compute score is 6,721. It also records 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 2,011. The K5200 has no equivalent scores in the data, so direct comparison is impossible, but the RTX 2060 SUPER’s performance in these additional tests reinforces its overall lead.

The K5200’s nearest-rival data puts its performance in context. It sits within 1% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX (19,410) and 0.8% below the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT (19,765). Those are modern cards, yet the K5200’s average score is competitive with them in this specific benchmark suite. That suggests the K5200’s Kepler architecture handles the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests better than many contemporary GPUs, even though its absolute scores lag the RTX 2060 SUPER by a wide margin.

The RTX 2060 SUPER’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18,159, -0.4%) and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 (18,189, -0.5%). Its average score of 18,093 is lower than the K5200’s 19,602, but that is because the RTX 2060 SUPER’s benchmark set includes more demanding tests like 3DMark Steel Nomad and PassMark DX12, which pull the average down. The shared-test results are the more reliable indicator of relative performance.

The Verdict

The data leaves little room for ambiguity. The RTX 2060 SUPER wins every head-to-head benchmark by a margin of roughly 74-75%. Its FP32 throughput of 7.181 TFLOPS is double the K5200’s 3.553 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s is more than double. Its clock speeds are over twice as high. It adds ray tracing, tensor cores, and modern API support. For any workload that can use these features, the RTX 2060 SUPER is the definitive choice.

The K5200’s strengths are narrower. Its 2,304 shading units exceed the RTX 2060 SUPER’s 2,176, and its 192 TMUs outnumber the newer card’s 136. Its 64th percentile ranking versus the RTX 2060 SUPER’s 62nd percentile suggests that, within its own benchmark set, it performs admirably. The K5200 also has a lower TDP at 150 W versus 175 W, and it uses a single 6-pin power connector rather than an 8-pin. For legacy professional applications that rely on Kepler-era optimizations or specific OpenGL paths, the K5200 may still function adequately.

But the verdict from the data is clear: the RTX 2060 SUPER is the superior card for virtually all modern workloads. Its launch MSRP of 399 USD, stated once here, reflects a product aimed at the mainstream enthusiast market, not the workstation segment. The K5200, released in July 2014, is end-of-life with no successor within the Kepler line. The RTX 2060 SUPER, released in July 2019, also is end-of-life, but its Turing architecture remains relevant for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 applications.

Choose the RTX 2060 SUPER for compute performance, modern APIs, and any ray tracing or tensor core workload. Choose the K5200 only if your software requires a Kepler-generation Quadro with its specific display outputs (2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2) and you cannot migrate to newer hardware. The benchmark results do not support any other conclusion.