GPU Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between these two NVIDIA offerings. The Quadro 5000, a Fermi-generation workstation card from 2011, and the GeForce GTX 750, a Maxwell-generation consumer card from 2014, occupy different performance tiers despite similar average benchmark scores. Based strictly on the benchmark data, the GeForce GTX 750 is the superior compute performer in the one available head-to-head test, delivering 9,315 points in Geekbench OpenCL versus the Quadro 5000's 7,289 points. That is a 21.7% advantage for the GTX 750.

The average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The Quadro 5000 averages 7,289 points across its single benchmark entry, while the GTX 750 averages 7,222 points across three different benchmark tests (OpenCL, Metal, and Vulkan). The delta between their average scores is only 0.9%, placing them in the same performance neighborhood. Both cards sit at the 40th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning half of all GPUs are faster and half are slower. For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL workloads, the GTX 750 wins decisively. For users who need a workstation-class card with specific professional feature sets, the Quadro 5000 remains relevant despite its older architecture. The GTX 750 is the pick for general compute performance; the Quadro 5000 is the pick for professional workstation contexts where its 2.5 GB memory and 320-bit bus might matter more than raw throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 750 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark available. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 9,315 versus the Quadro 5000's 7,289, a 21.7% margin. This indicates the Maxwell architecture delivers substantially better compute performance per clock and per watt than the older Fermi design. The GTX 750 also demonstrates versatility across multiple API benchmarks: it scores 4,274 in Geekbench Metal, 8,078 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 9,315 in Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro 5000 has no Vulkan support listed and no Metal benchmark score, limiting its measurable API coverage to OpenCL only.

The Quadro 5000 wins in memory capacity and bus width. It offers 2.5 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 320-bit bus, delivering 120.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 750 has 1024 MB (1 GB) on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-capacity-bound or bandwidth-sensitive, the Quadro 5000's specifications suggest it can handle larger datasets without spilling to system memory. The Quadro 5000 also has higher pixel rate in texture-heavy scenarios? No, the GTX 750 actually wins pixel rate at 17.36 GPixel/s versus 11.29 GPixel/s, and texture rate at 34.72 GTexel/s versus 22.57 GTexel/s. The Quadro 5000's advantage is strictly memory-related: more capacity and higher bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different NVIDIA architectures and process nodes. The Quadro 5000 uses the GF100 chip built on Fermi architecture at 40 nm, while the GTX 750 uses the GM107 chip on Maxwell architecture at 28 nm. Both are manufactured by TSMC. The Quadro 5000 packs 3,100 million transistors into a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 5.9 million per square millimeter. The GTX 750 contains 1,870 million transistors on a much smaller 148 mm² die, achieving 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The Maxwell chip is more than twice as dense, reflecting the newer manufacturing process.

Shading unit counts differ significantly. The Quadro 5000 has 352 shading units, 44 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 40 render output units (ROPs). The GTX 750 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the Quadro 5000's higher ROP count suggests it was designed for different workload characteristics, more pixel-pushing capacity for professional visualization tasks. The GTX 750's higher shading unit count with fewer ROPs aligns with consumer gaming workloads.

Memory clocks also diverge. The Quadro 5000 runs its GDDR5 at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective), while the GTX 750 runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The GTX 750 has explicit base and boost clocks of 1020 MHz and 1085 MHz respectively; the Quadro 5000 lists no base or boost clock in the data. The GTX 750 also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro 5000 lists no Vulkan support. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The GeForce GTX 750 scores 9,315 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the Quadro 5000's 7,289, a 21.7% advantage for the GTX 750.

Q: Do the two cards have similar average benchmark scores?

A: Yes. The Quadro 5000 averages 7,289 points, and the GTX 750 averages 7,222 points. The difference is only 0.9%, placing both at the 40th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The Quadro 5000 has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 750 has 1024 MB (1 GB). The Quadro also has a wider 320-bit bus versus the GTX 750's 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Quadro 5000 has a TDP of 152 W and requires a 450 W suggested power supply with a 1x 6-pin connector. The GTX 750 has a TDP of 55 W, a 250 W suggested power supply, and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: Only the GeForce GTX 750 lists Vulkan 1.4 support. The Quadro 5000 shows no Vulkan support in its API specifications.

Q: What are the physical size differences?

A: The Quadro 5000 is 248 mm (9.8 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall, occupying a dual-slot width. The GTX 750 is 145 mm (5.7 inches) long and uses a single-slot design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL. The GeForce GTX 750 wins with 9,315 points against the Quadro 5000's 7,289. The delta percentage is -21.7%, meaning the Quadro 5000 trails by 21.7%. This is a substantial margin that indicates a generational leap in compute efficiency.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional context. The Quadro 5000's closest rival is the GTX 750 itself, with a delta of only 0.9% on average scores. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile trails by 1.2%, the GTX 560 SE by 1.6%, and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 by 1.7%. The GTX 750's nearest rivals are even closer: the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile is 0.3% behind, the GTX 560 SE and Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 are both 0.7% behind, and the GTX 970 is 0.9% behind. These tight deltas show that both cards sit in a crowded mid-range performance band.

The GTX 750's additional benchmark scores reveal its API versatility. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 4,274; in Vulkan, 8,078; and in OpenCL, 9,315. The Quadro 5000 has only the one OpenCL score. This means the GTX 750 can be evaluated across more modern API workloads, while the Quadro 5000's data is limited to a single legacy test. The GTX 750's OpenCL score is its best result, suggesting the Maxwell architecture is particularly well-suited to compute tasks. The Vulkan score of 8,078 is close to the OpenCL result, indicating consistent performance across API types. The Metal score of 4,274 is notably lower, though this may reflect API optimization rather than raw hardware capability.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two cards differ:

| Specification | Quadro 5000 | GTX 750 |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 529 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 1020 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1085 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 750 MHz (3 Gbps) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 2.5 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 320 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 120.0 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 352 | 512 |

| TMUs | 44 | 32 |

| ROPs | 40 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.29 GPixel/s | 17.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.57 GTexel/s | 34.72 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 722.3 GFLOPS | 1,111.0 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 152 W | 55 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a |

| Vulkan Support | Not listed | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2011-02-22 | 2014-02-17 |

| Launch MSRP | 2,499 USD | 119 USD |

| Length | 248 mm (9.8 in) | 145 mm (5.7 in) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 in) | Not listed |

The GTX 750 wins on every compute throughput metric: FP32 (1,111.0 GFLOPS versus 722.3), pixel rate, texture rate, and shading units. The Quadro 5000 wins on memory capacity, bus width, bandwidth, ROP count, and physical size. The GTX 750 also draws far less power (55 W versus 152 W) and requires no external power connector, making it significantly easier to integrate into existing systems. The Quadro 5000's higher launch MSRP reflects its professional positioning, but the data shows its performance does not justify that premium in compute workloads.