NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB vs NVIDIA Quadro P400 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB and the NVIDIA Quadro P400 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a generational chasm. The RTX 5060 Ti holds a decisive performance lead across every measurable metric, while the Quadro P400 is a legacy entry-level professional card from a different architectural era. Based on average benchmark scores, the RTX 5060 Ti posts a 4970 average, edging out the Quadro P400’s 4684, but this narrow aggregate difference masks the fact that the two cards were tested under entirely different workloads and that the RTX 5060 Ti’s raw compute advantages are overwhelming.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking contrast between these two GPUs is the sheer scale of the compute disparity. The RTX 5060 Ti delivers 23.70 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Quadro P400 manages just 641.0 GFLOPS—a 37-fold advantage for the newer card. In FP16 workloads, the gap widens further: the RTX 5060 Ti achieves 23.70 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the Quadro P400 produces a paltry 10.02 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio, making the RTX 5060 Ti roughly 2,366 times faster in half-precision compute. These figures are not close, and no benchmark result suggests the Quadro P400 can compete in any compute-intensive task.

Pixel throughput tells a similar story. The RTX 5060 Ti renders at 123.5 GPixel/s, while the Quadro P400 is limited to 20.03 GPixel/s—a 6.2x difference. Texture fill rates follow suit: 370.4 GTexel/s versus 20.03 GTexel/s, an 18.5x gap. The RTX 5060 Ti’s memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s dwarfs the Quadro P400’s 32.06 GB/s, a 14x difference that directly impacts high-resolution texture streaming and multi-sample anti-aliasing workloads.

In the direct benchmark comparisons available, the RTX 5060 Ti posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4019, a result that has no equivalent on the Quadro P400. The Quadro P400’s only benchmark scores come from Geekbench OpenCL (4249) and Vulkan (5119), neither of which the RTX 5060 Ti has a recorded result for. The PassMark suite shows the RTX 5060 Ti scoring 22618 in G3D and 11224 in GPU compute, while the Quadro P400 has no PassMark entries. This non-overlapping test methodology means the 4970 versus 4684 average score comparison is not a direct apples-to-apples measure; it reflects different workload profiles, with the RTX 5060 Ti’s average pulled down by low DirectX-specific scores (89 in PassMark DX12, 144 in DX10) that are absent from the Quadro P400’s testing regimen.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on architectures separated by two major generational leaps. The RTX 5060 Ti uses the GB206 chip based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro P400 relies on the GP107 chip with Pascal architecture, produced on a 14 nm process at Samsung. This process difference alone accounts for a significant portion of the performance gap: the RTX 5060 Ti packs 21,900 million transistors into a 181 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 121.0M per mm², while the Quadro P400 contains just 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die for a density of 25.0M per mm².

Core configurations diverge dramatically. The RTX 5060 Ti features 4,608 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output pipelines. The Quadro P400 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RTX 5060 Ti also includes 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores—hardware that the Quadro P400 lacks entirely, as it predates both RT and tensor core implementations. This architectural gap means the RTX 5060 Ti supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-driven features like DLSS, while the Quadro P400 is limited to traditional rasterization.

Memory architecture reinforces the divide. The RTX 5060 Ti uses 16 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the Quadro P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. The RTX 5060 Ti’s memory clock runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), compared to the Quadro P400’s 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The RTX 5060 Ti also supports PCIe 5.0 x8, whereas the Quadro P400 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The newer card’s API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Quadro P400 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1) — a difference that affects advanced DX12 features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5060 Ti wins in every scenario that demands raw compute, modern graphics features, or high-resolution gaming. Its 23.70 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 144 tensor cores, and 36 ray tracing cores make it suitable for real-time ray tracing, AI inference, and content creation workloads. The 16 GB GDDR7 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth enables large texture sets and high-resolution rendering without swapping. The card’s 180 W TDP, while substantial, is paired with a suggested 450 W PSU, indicating it targets mainstream desktop builds.

The Quadro P400 wins only in scenarios where its extreme low power and physical footprint matter. It draws just 30 W with no power connectors required, fitting into a single-slot 150 mm form factor. This makes it viable for small form factor workstations, legacy systems with minimal power delivery, or as a basic display adapter for multi-monitor setups—it supports three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Its 2 GB GDDR5 memory and 32.06 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 2D desktop workloads and light productivity, but the card’s 641.0 GFLOPS FP32 and 10.02 GFLOPS FP16 performance place it firmly in the entry-level tier for any 3D application.

The benchmark percentiles reinforce this split. The RTX 5060 Ti sits at the 29th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro P400 sits at the 27th percentile. These near-identical percentiles reflect the fact that both cards are mid-pack in the overall GPU population, but the RTX 5060 Ti’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (delta -0.2%), AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (-0.6%), and AMD Radeon R7 M360 (+0.8%). The Quadro P400’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB (+0.6%), AMD Radeon R5 M320 (+0.6%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (+1.2%). Neither card competes at the high end of the benchmark distribution.

Specification Differences

The specifications where the two cards differ are extensive and define their respective identities. The RTX 5060 Ti uses a 5 nm process at TSMC; the Quadro P400 uses 14 nm at Samsung. Transistor counts are 21,900 million versus 3,300 million. Die sizes are 181 mm² versus 132 mm². Base clocks are 2407 MHz versus 1228 MHz; boost clocks are 2572 MHz versus 1252 MHz. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz versus 1002 MHz. Memory size is 16 GB versus 2 GB; type is GDDR7 versus GDDR5; bus width is 128-bit versus 64-bit; bandwidth is 448.0 GB/s versus 32.06 GB/s.

Shading units are 4,608 versus 256; TMUs are 144 versus 16; ROPs are 48 versus 16. The RTX 5060 Ti has 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores; the Quadro P400 has none. Pixel rates are 123.5 GPixel/s versus 20.03 GPixel/s; texture rates are 370.4 GTexel/s versus 20.03 GTexel/s; FP32 is 23.70 TFLOPS versus 641.0 GFLOPS; FP16 is 23.70 TFLOPS versus 10.02 GFLOPS. TDP is 180 W versus 30 W; slot width is dual-slot versus single-slot; power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus none; suggested PSU is 450 W versus 200 W. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b versus 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate versus 12 (12_1). Dimensions are 241 mm length and 111 mm height versus 150 mm length and 69 mm height. The RTX 5060 Ti’s launch MSRP is 429 USD; the Quadro P400 has no listed MSRP. Production status is Active versus End-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more raw compute power?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti delivers 23.70 TFLOPS FP32 and 23.70 TFLOPS FP16, versus the Quadro P400’s 641.0 GFLOPS FP32 and 10.02 GFLOPS FP16.

Q: Do both cards support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The RTX 5060 Ti has 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores; the Quadro P400 has no RT or tensor cores.

Q: What are the memory differences?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti has 16 GB GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth; the Quadro P400 has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 32.06 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: Based on TDP, the Quadro P400 draws 30 W with no power connectors, while the RTX 5060 Ti draws 180 W with a single 8-pin connector.

Q: Are these cards comparable for modern gaming?

A: No. The RTX 5060 Ti supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and PCIe 5.0, while the Quadro P400 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and PCIe 3.0.

Q: Which card has a higher benchmark percentile ranking?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti sits at the 29th percentile of all GPUs; the Quadro P400 sits at the 27th percentile.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is the superior card for any workload involving 3D rendering, compute, or modern graphics APIs. Its 37x FP32 advantage, 14x memory bandwidth lead, and support for ray tracing and tensor cores make it the only choice for gaming, content creation, or AI-adjacent tasks. The card’s 29th percentile ranking, while not elite, is functionally irrelevant when compared against the Quadro P400’s 27th percentile, because the RTX 5060 Ti’s benchmark profile includes far more demanding tests that the Quadro P400 cannot even run.

The Quadro P400’s sole advantages are its 30 W power draw, single-slot profile, and lack of external power connectors. These traits suit it for embedded systems, legacy workstations, or as a multi-display output card where compute performance is secondary. But its 2 GB memory, 64-bit bus, and Pascal-era architecture limit it to basic 2D productivity or very light 3D workloads. For any user choosing between these two cards for a build, the RTX 5060 Ti is the only rational selection unless the system physically cannot accommodate a dual-slot, 180 W card requiring a 450 W PSU. The Quadro P400 is an end-of-life product with no path to modern gaming or professional 3D workloads, and the benchmark data confirms that no workload exists where it outperforms the RTX 5060 Ti.