NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro K5200 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200, and the results are decisive in both cases. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 5060 Mobile scores 96,969 while the Quadro K5200 scores 19,024. This represents a 409.7% advantage for the newer mobile part, a margin that dwarfs nearly every other comparison in the database. The RTX 5060 Mobile does not merely outperform the K5200; it more than quintuples the older workstation card's compute throughput in this API.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, tells a similar story. The RTX 5060 Mobile posts 96,451 points against the Quadro K5200's 20,180 points. The delta here is 378%, slightly lower than the OpenCL gap but still an overwhelming victory. Vulkan was not available in any meaningful form when the K5200 launched, and the data reflects that generational chasm. The K5200's score in Vulkan is only about 21% of the RTX 5060 Mobile's result, indicating that the older card's driver support and hardware capabilities lag far behind modern API expectations.

Beyond these two shared tests, the database records additional benchmark scores for the RTX 5060 Mobile that have no corresponding entries for the Quadro K5200. The RTX 5060 Mobile achieves 3,013.5 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, a modern test that the K5200 does not appear in the database for at all. In Passmark tests, the RTX 5060 Mobile scores 18,852 in G3D, 7,607 in GPU Compute, 876 in G2D, 203 in DirectX 9, 168 in DirectX 11, 119 in DirectX 10, and 87 in DirectX 12. The K5200 has no recorded Passmark results, so no direct comparison is possible, but the RTX 5060 Mobile's average benchmark score of 22,435 across all recorded tests versus the K5200's average of 19,602 gives a broader context for where each card sits in the overall landscape.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional perspective. The RTX 5060 Mobile's average score places it 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT, 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700, 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6700S, and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile. This clustering suggests the RTX 5060 Mobile is positioned in a tight competitive band around the 22,000 to 22,700 average score range. The Quadro K5200, by contrast, sits 0.2% behind the AMD FirePro D300, 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT, 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XTX, and 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB. The K5200's rivals are a mix of older workstation and consumer cards, and its average score of 19,602 places it in a lower performance tier than the RTX 5060 Mobile's 22,435.

The percentile rankings reinforce this gap. The RTX 5060 Mobile sits at the 67th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Quadro K5200 sits at the 64th percentile. While both are above the median, the three-percentage-point difference in percentile masks a much larger absolute score gap. The RTX 5060 Mobile's average score is roughly 14.5% higher than the K5200's, which is a substantial margin in real-world performance terms.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the most head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile wins both recorded head-to-head tests. It takes the Geekbench OpenCL test with a 409.7% delta and the Geekbench Vulkan test with a 378% delta, giving it 2 wins to 0 for the Quadro K5200.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 Mobile compare to the Quadro K5200 in OpenCL performance?

A: The RTX 5060 Mobile scores 96,969 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Quadro K5200 scores 19,024. The RTX 5060 Mobile is 409.7% faster, meaning it delivers roughly five times the compute throughput in this specific workload.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The RTX 5060 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 22,435 across all recorded tests. The Quadro K5200 has an average benchmark score of 19,602. The RTX 5060 Mobile's average is approximately 14.5% higher.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the Quadro K5200 beats the RTX 5060 Mobile?

A: No. In the two tests where both GPUs have recorded scores (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RTX 5060 Mobile wins both. The Quadro K5200 has no recorded wins in any head-to-head comparison.

Q: How does each GPU rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The RTX 5060 Mobile is at the 67th percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro K5200 is at the 64th percentile. Both are above the midpoint, but the RTX 5060 Mobile sits higher in the overall distribution.

Q: What kind of performance gap exists in the Vulkan API?

A: The RTX 5060 Mobile scores 96,451 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the Quadro K5200's 20,180. The delta is 378%, indicating the RTX 5060 Mobile is nearly five times faster in this modern graphics API.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting more than a decade of silicon evolution. The RTX 5060 Mobile is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB206 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro K5200 uses the Kepler architecture with the GK110B chip, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference alone, 5 nm versus 28 nm, explains much of the performance and efficiency disparity. The RTX 5060 Mobile packs 21,900 million transistors into a die size of 181 mm², yielding a transistor density of 121.0M per mm². The Quadro K5200 contains 7,080 million transistors on a much larger 561 mm² die, resulting in a density of only 12.6M per mm². The RTX 5060 Mobile crams more than three times the transistors into roughly one-third the silicon area.

The RTX 5060 Mobile features 3,328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. It also includes 26 ray tracing cores and 104 tensor cores, hardware that does not exist on the Quadro K5200 at all. The K5200 has 2,304 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, but no ray tracing or tensor core support. The RTX 5060 Mobile's shading unit count is 44% higher, and its modern architecture allows those units to execute far more efficiently per clock. The K5200's TMU count is higher, but the RTX 5060 Mobile's texture rate of 151.3 GTexel/s still edges out the K5200's 148.0 GTexel/s. Pixel rates tell a clearer story: the RTX 5060 Mobile delivers 69.84 GPixel/s versus the K5200's 37.01 GPixel/s, a near-doubling of rasterization throughput.

The RTX 5060 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro K5200 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RTX 5060 Mobile supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to the K5200's Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 5060 Mobile also includes modern features like mesh shaders, variable rate shading, and hardware-accelerated ray tracing, which are absent on the Kepler architecture. The K5200's lack of tensor cores means no DLSS or AI-accelerated workloads, while the RTX 5060 Mobile can leverage its 104 tensor cores for such tasks. The production status also differs: the RTX 5060 Mobile is Active, while the Quadro K5200 is End-of-life, with a successor listed as Quadro Maxwell.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows extensive divergence between the two GPUs. The RTX 5060 Mobile has a base clock of 952 MHz and a boost clock of 1455 MHz, while the Quadro K5200 runs at 667 MHz base and 771 MHz boost. The RTX 5060 Mobile's boost clock is nearly double the K5200's, contributing significantly to its performance advantage. Memory configurations differ in type and bandwidth: the RTX 5060 Mobile uses 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Quadro K5200 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing only 192.3 GB/s. Despite having half the bus width, the RTX 5060 Mobile achieves exactly double the memory bandwidth thanks to faster GDDR7 memory running at 24 Gbps effective versus the K5200's 6 Gbps effective.

The power and physical specifications are dramatically different. The RTX 5060 Mobile has a TDP of 45 W, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors, and requires no suggested PSU. The Quadro K5200 draws 150 W, occupies a dual-slot form factor, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and lists a 450 W suggested PSU. The K5200 is a large card measuring 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the RTX 5060 Mobile has no recorded dimensions as it is designed for portable devices. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 5.0 x16 for the RTX 5060 Mobile versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Quadro K5200. Display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for the RTX 5060 Mobile, while the K5200 offers 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

The RTX 5060 Mobile has a release date of May 19, 2025, while the Quadro K5200 was released on July 21, 2014. The RTX 5060 Mobile belongs to the GeForce 50-series and has the GeForce 40 Mobile as its predecessor. The Quadro K5200's predecessor is Quadro Fermi, and its successor is Quadro Maxwell. The RTX 5060 Mobile's FP32 compute is 9.684 TFLOPS, and its FP16 is also 9.684 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The Quadro K5200 delivers 3.553 TFLOPS of FP32 and has no recorded FP16 capability. The RTX 5060 Mobile's transistor density of 121.0M per mm² versus the K5200's 12.6M per mm² represents a 10-fold improvement in integration density.

The Verdict

The benchmark data leaves no ambiguity: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile is the superior GPU in every measurable way. It wins both head-to-head tests, has a higher average benchmark score (22,435 versus 19,602), and sits at a higher percentile among all GPUs (67th versus 64th). The OpenCL delta of 409.7% and the Vulkan delta of 378% are not incremental improvements; they are generational leaps that reflect over a decade of architectural advancement. Anyone selecting between these two cards for compute-intensive workloads should choose the RTX 5060 Mobile without hesitation, provided the form factor and power constraints allow for it.

The Quadro K5200's only advantages lie in its physical design for workstation desktops and its dual-slot cooling, but these are not performance benefits. The K5200's higher TDP of 150 W, larger die size of 561 mm², and older Kepler architecture all work against it. The RTX 5060 Mobile achieves roughly five times the OpenCL performance while consuming one-third the power (45 W versus 150 W). The RTX 5060 Mobile also offers modern API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the K5200 is stuck with DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. For users who need ray tracing, tensor core acceleration, or the latest graphics features, the K5200 is not viable at all.

The production status difference reinforces the verdict: the RTX 5060 Mobile is Active, while the Quadro K5200 is End-of-life. The K5200's successor, Quadro Maxwell, has come and gone, and the architecture is obsolete by modern standards. The RTX 5060 Mobile, by contrast, is a current-generation product with ongoing driver support and future software compatibility. The data suggests that the RTX 5060 Mobile is not just a better choice; it is the only rational choice for anyone building a system around either GPU today.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5060 Mobile wins in every scenario where performance matters. In raw compute workloads measured by Geekbench OpenCL, it delivers 409.7% more performance than the K5200. In Vulkan-based applications, it delivers 378% more. Its memory bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s is exactly double the K5200's 192.3 GB/s, which benefits texture-heavy workloads, high-resolution rendering, and data-intensive compute tasks. The RTX 5060 Mobile's FP32 throughput of 9.684 TFLOPS versus the K5200's 3.553 TFLOPS means general-purpose GPU compute tasks will complete nearly three times faster. Its ray tracing cores and tensor cores open up entirely new workloads that the K5200 cannot handle at all, including real-time ray tracing, DLSS, and AI inference.

The RTX 5060 Mobile also wins on efficiency and portability. Its 45 W TDP means it can operate in thin-and-light laptops, while the K5200's 150 W TDP requires a desktop workstation with a 450 W power supply. The RTX 5060 Mobile's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bandwidth of the K5200's PCIe 3.0 x16, reducing data transfer bottlenecks. Its GDDR7 memory operates at 24 Gbps effective, compared to the K5200's 6 Gbps GDDR5, allowing faster memory access for both gaming and professional workloads.

The Quadro K5200 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its only theoretical advantages are its larger 256-bit memory bus and higher TMU count, but these do not translate into superior performance in any recorded test. The K5200's 192 TMUs versus the RTX 5060 Mobile's 104 TMUs might suggest better texture throughput, but the recorded texture rates tell the opposite story: 148.0 GTexel/s for the K5200 versus 151.3 GTexel/s for the RTX 5060 Mobile. The K5200's dual-slot design and 267 mm length might fit certain workstation chassis, but that is a physical compatibility consideration, not a performance one.

For users who need a desktop workstation card with legacy display outputs like DVI, the K5200 offers 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The RTX 5060 Mobile's outputs are portable device dependent, meaning it cannot drive a desktop monitor without appropriate adapters or docking solutions. This is the only scenario where the K5200 has a practical edge: a fixed desktop workstation with legacy DVI monitors and no need for modern features. For every other use case, including gaming, content creation, compute, AI, and professional 3D rendering, the RTX 5060 Mobile is the clear winner based on the recorded benchmark data.