NVIDIA Quadro K5000 vs NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K5000 has a higher average benchmark score of 9,637 compared to the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition's average of 9,037. The Quadro K5000 also holds a slightly higher percentile rank among all GPUs at 46 versus the TITAN V CEO Edition's 45.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The TITAN V CEO Edition is dramatically ahead, featuring 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus with 868.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K5000 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two?

A: The Quadro K5000 is built on the Kepler architecture (chip GK104) using a 28 nm process, while the TITAN V CEO Edition uses the Volta architecture (chip GV100) on a 12 nm process. The TITAN V has 640 tensor cores, which the Quadro K5000 lacks entirely.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The TITAN V CEO Edition is vastly superior in raw compute. It delivers 14.90 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 29.80 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), compared to the Quadro K5000's 2.169 TFLOPS FP32 and no listed FP16 capability.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Quadro K5000 has a TDP of 122 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W PSU. The TITAN V CEO Edition has a TDP of 250 W, requires a 6-pin plus an 8-pin connector, and needs a suggested 600 W PSU.

Q: Do both cards support the same API levels?

A: No. The TITAN V CEO Edition supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Quadro K5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architecture gap between these two GPUs is enormous. The Quadro K5000 is a Kepler-generation part built on TSMC's 28 nm process, packing 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die. The TITAN V CEO Edition is a Volta-generation chip on TSMC's 12 nm process, with 21,100 million transistors crammed into a much larger 815 mm² die. This translates to a transistor density of 25.9M per mm² for the TITAN V versus 12.0M per mm² for the Quadro — a direct reflection of the process node advantage.

The compute architecture diverges sharply. The Quadro K5000 has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN V CEO Edition more than triples the shading units to 5,120, doubles TMUs to 320, and quadruples ROPs to 128. The TITAN V also introduces 640 tensor cores — hardware designed for deep learning workloads that the Kepler-based Quadro simply cannot access. This is not an incremental step; it is a generational leap in parallel processing capability.

Memory architecture is another critical differentiator. The Quadro K5000 relies on 4 GB of GDDR5 across a 256-bit bus, yielding 172.8 GB/s. The TITAN V CEO Edition uses 32 GB of HBM2 across a 4096-bit bus, delivering 868.4 GB/s — five times the bandwidth. The clock speeds tell a similar story: the TITAN V runs at 1200 MHz base and 1455 MHz boost, while the Quadro K5000 is locked at 706 MHz for both base and boost.

The TITAN V's memory clock is listed as 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective), which is lower in raw MHz than the Quadro's 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective), but the HBM2 architecture's massive bus width completely compensates. The result is that the TITAN V's pixel rate of 186.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 465.6 GTexel/s dwarf the Quadro K5000's 22.59 GPixel/s and 90.37 GTexel/s.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition is the far more powerful GPU in nearly every measurable specification. Its FP32 throughput of 14.90 TFLOPS is nearly seven times the Quadro K5000's 2.169 TFLOPS. Its 32 GB of HBM2 memory with 868.4 GB/s bandwidth is in a different performance class entirely. For any workload that stresses compute, memory capacity, or memory bandwidth, the TITAN V is the clear choice.

However, the benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The Quadro K5000 actually posts a higher average benchmark score (9,637) than the TITAN V CEO Edition (9,037) in the available tests. This counterintuitive result reflects the specific benchmarks recorded: the Quadro K5000 has Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan scores, while the TITAN V CEO Edition only has Passmark G2D and G3D scores. These are different test suites, and they are not directly comparable. The percentile ranks (46 vs 45) are nearly identical, suggesting that in the aggregate database, these two cards land at similar positions despite their architectural differences.

Who should pick which? If the workload is modern compute-heavy tasks, AI inference with tensor cores, or large dataset manipulation requiring massive memory capacity, the TITAN V CEO Edition is the only rational choice. If the workload is legacy OpenGL or specific professional applications that rely on the Kepler architecture's mature driver path, the Quadro K5000 remains a functional, lower-power option. The Quadro K5000's 122 W TDP and single 6-pin connector make it far easier to integrate into existing systems with modest power supplies. But for raw performance, the TITAN V wins overwhelmingly.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro K5000 | NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | Volta |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 21,100 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 815 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 25.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 706 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 706 MHz | 1455 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) | 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 868.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 128 | 320 |

| ROPs | 32 | 128 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 640 |

| Pixel Rate | 22.59 GPixel/s | 186.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 90.37 GTexel/s | 465.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.169 TFLOPS | 14.90 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None listed | 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 122 W | 250 W |

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

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 600 W |

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

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2012-08-16 | 2018-06-20 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards have no overlapping benchmark tests in the data, making direct comparisons impossible. The Quadro K5000's benchmark results are all from Geekbench: a Metal score of 6,324, an OpenCL score of 11,418, and a Vulkan score of 11,169. The TITAN V CEO Edition's scores come from Passmark: a G2D score of 1,086 and a G3D score of 16,988.

The TITAN V's G3D score of 16,988 is exceptionally high, far exceeding the Quadro K5000's best Geekbench result of 11,418 in OpenCL. This suggests that in DirectX or OpenGL gaming-style workloads, the TITAN V is dramatically faster. The Quadro K5000's Vulkan score of 11,169 is close to its OpenCL score, indicating consistent performance across different API paths.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context. The Quadro K5000's average score of 9,637 places it just 0.1% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M (9,645), 0.2% below the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9,653), 0.3% below the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (9,665), and 0.8% below the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (9,716). The TITAN V CEO Edition's average of 9,037 is 0.2% above the GeForce GTX 660 (9,022), 0.2% below the GeForce GTX 560 (9,058), 1.3% above the Radeon 550X (8,918), and 1.9% below the Radeon 890M (9,210). These rival deltas are all within a narrow band, reinforcing that the average benchmark scores for both cards cluster near the 9,000–9,700 range.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition wins decisively in: Raw compute performance. Its FP32 throughput of 14.90 TFLOPS is nearly seven times the Quadro K5000's 2.169 TFLOPS. FP16 workloads are a TITAN V exclusive at 29.80 TFLOPS, with the Quadro K5000 listing no FP16 capability. Memory capacity and bandwidth are overwhelmingly in the TITAN V's favor — 32 GB versus 4 GB, and 868.4 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s. For AI or machine learning tasks that can utilize the 640 tensor cores, the TITAN V is in an entirely different league. Its pixel rate (186.2 GPixel/s vs 22.59 GPixel/s) and texture rate (465.6 GTexel/s vs 90.37 GTexel/s) also dominate.

NVIDIA Quadro K5000 wins in: Its average benchmark score of 9,637 edges out the TITAN V's 9,037. The Quadro K5000 also has a marginally higher percentile rank (46 vs 45). Power efficiency is another area where the Quadro excels — its 122 W TDP is less than half the TITAN V's 250 W, and it only requires a single 6-pin connector with a 300 W suggested PSU versus the TITAN V's 6+8 pin setup and 600 W requirement. The Quadro's launch MSRP was 2,499 USD. For systems with limited power delivery or physical space constraints (both cards are dual-slot and 267 mm long, but the Quadro is 111 mm tall versus the TITAN V's 112 mm), the Quadro is simpler to deploy. The Quadro's PCIe 2.0 x16 interface is older, but its 2x DVI outputs may be preferable for legacy display setups.