NVIDIA Quadro K5100M vs NVIDIA Tesla M10 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and NVIDIA Tesla M10 are both end-of-life professional GPUs built on TSMC’s 28 nm process, but they target entirely different workloads. Benchmark data shows the Quadro K5100M holds a narrow overall advantage in the single head-to-head test available, while the Tesla M10 counters with a higher boost clock and a more modern architecture. The data indicates these are not direct competitors in the traditional sense, but rather two specialized tools for distinct computing environments.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results clearly favor the Quadro K5100M. In this test, the Quadro K5100M scores 11,771 points, while the Tesla M10 manages 10,318 points. This represents a 14.1% advantage for the Quadro K5100M, which is a substantial margin in compute workloads. The Quadro’s higher shader count and wider memory bus are the primary reasons for this victory, as the data shows it carries 1,536 shading units and a 256-bit memory interface, compared to the Tesla M10’s 640 shading units and 128-bit interface.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the two cards sit very close in overall average scores. The Quadro K5100M achieves an average benchmark score of 10,043, placing it in the 48th percentile of all GPUs. The Tesla M10 trails with an average score of 9,724, which puts it in the 47th percentile. This 3.2% difference in average scores is smaller than the OpenCL delta, suggesting the Quadro’s advantage is most pronounced in compute-heavy tasks. Interestingly, the Quadro K5100M’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R9 M375, which scores 10,070 with a delta of -0.3%, meaning the Quadro is essentially tied with that part. The Tesla M10’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, which scores 9,780 with a delta of -0.6%, again showing near-parity.

The data also reveals that the Quadro K5100M has a Geekbench Metal score of 8,315, a test the Tesla M10 does not appear in. Conversely, the Tesla M10 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9,130, a test the Quadro does not appear in. This suggests the two cards have different API strengths, with the Quadro leaning toward Apple’s Metal framework and the Tesla M10 favoring Vulkan. In the OpenCL test, which both share, the Quadro’s 14.1% win is the decisive factor in its overall victory in the head-to-head comparison, where it claims 1 win versus 0 for the Tesla M10.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant, as they come from different NVIDIA generations. The Quadro K5100M is built on the Kepler architecture using the GK104 chip, while the Tesla M10 uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip. Both are fabricated by TSMC at 28 nm, but the transistor counts diverge sharply. The Quadro K5100M packs 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the Tesla M10 has just 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. This means the Tesla M10 has a higher transistor density of 12.6M per mm² compared to the Quadro’s 12.0M per mm², indicating a more efficient use of silicon.

The Kepler-based Quadro K5100M features 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. Its base and boost clocks are identical at 771 MHz, with memory running at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). The Maxwell-based Tesla M10, despite having fewer cores, runs much faster: its base clock is 1,033 MHz and its boost clock reaches 1,306 MHz, with memory at 1,300 MHz (5.2 Gbps effective). This clock speed advantage helps the Tesla M10 partially compensate for its smaller core count, though it cannot fully overcome the Quadro’s 2.4x advantage in shading units.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the Quadro K5100M uses a 256-bit bus to achieve 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Tesla M10 is limited to a 128-bit bus and 83.20 GB/s. The Quadro’s pixel rate is 24.67 GPixel/s versus the Tesla M10’s 20.90 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 98.69 GTexel/s versus 52.24 GTexel/s. In raw FP32 compute, the Quadro outputs 2.369 TFLOPS while the Tesla M10 delivers 1.672 TFLOPS, a 41.7% advantage for the Quadro. Neither card supports FP16 or ray tracing, as both predate those features.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Quadro K5100M wins decisively in FP32 compute, delivering 2.369 TFLOPS versus the Tesla M10’s 1.672 TFLOPS, a 41.7% advantage. Its 1,536 shading units vastly outnumber the Tesla M10’s 640, even though the Tesla M10 runs at a higher boost clock of 1,306 MHz versus 771 MHz.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The Quadro K5100M is based on the Kepler architecture (GK104 chip), while the Tesla M10 uses the Maxwell architecture (GM107 chip). Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the Tesla M10 is a newer design with a higher transistor density of 12.6M per mm² compared to the Quadro’s 12.0M per mm².

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Quadro K5100M offers significantly more memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s thanks to its 256-bit bus, while the Tesla M10 is capped at 83.20 GB/s with a 128-bit bus. Both use 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the Quadro’s wider interface gives it a 38.5% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which card wins in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The Quadro K5100M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test by a 14.1% margin, scoring 11,771 versus the Tesla M10’s 10,318. This is the only head-to-head benchmark shared by both cards, and it is the deciding factor in the overall comparison.

Q: What is the form factor difference between the two?

A: The Quadro K5100M is an MXM Module with a bus interface of MXM-B (3.0) and no power connectors, making it suitable for mobile workstations. The Tesla M10 is a dual-slot PCIe card with a 267 mm length, uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan support?

A: The Tesla M10 supports Vulkan 1.4 and has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9,130. The Quadro K5100M only supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and has no recorded Vulkan benchmark. However, both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every major specification point. The Quadro K5100M uses the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, while the Tesla M10 uses Maxwell with the GM107 chip. Transistor counts are 3,540 million versus 1,870 million, and die sizes are 294 mm² versus 148 mm². Clock speeds favor the Tesla M10: base 1,033 MHz versus 771 MHz, boost 1,306 MHz versus 771 MHz, and memory 5.2 Gbps effective versus 3.6 Gbps effective.

The Quadro K5100M has far more execution resources: 1,536 shading units versus 640, 128 TMUs versus 40, and 32 ROPs versus 16. Memory bus width is 256-bit versus 128-bit, resulting in bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s versus 83.20 GB/s. Pixel rate is 24.67 GPixel/s versus 20.90 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 98.69 GTexel/s versus 52.24 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.369 TFLOPS versus 1.672 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specifications diverge significantly. The Quadro K5100M has a TDP of 100 W, uses an MXM Module slot, has no power connectors, and a bus interface of MXM-B (3.0). The Tesla M10 has a TDP of 225 W, uses a dual-slot form factor, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, suggests a 550 W PSU, and uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the Quadro K5100M has "Portable Device Dependent" outputs, while the Tesla M10 has no outputs at all.

Release dates show the Quadro K5100M came first on 2013-07-22, while the Tesla M10 followed on 2016-05-17. Their API support differs only in Vulkan version: the Quadro supports 1.2.175 while the Tesla M10 supports 1.4. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro K5100M’s predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is Quadro Maxwell-M, while the Tesla M10’s predecessor is Tesla Kepler and its successor is Tesla Pascal.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear picture for different use cases. The Quadro K5100M is the superior compute performer, winning the only shared benchmark by 14.1% and offering 41.7% more FP32 throughput. Its 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and 256-bit bus make it better suited for memory-intensive workloads, and its 100 W TDP means it can operate in power-constrained mobile environments. The 8 GB GDDR5 memory capacity is identical between the two, but the Quadro’s wider interface ensures that capacity is used more effectively.

The Tesla M10, despite losing the head-to-head comparison, brings its own advantages. Its Maxwell architecture is more modern, as reflected in its higher boost clock of 1,306 MHz and support for Vulkan 1.4. The higher transistor density of 12.6M per mm² indicates a more efficient design. However, the Tesla M10’s 225 W TDP and requirement for a 550 W PSU make it a server-oriented part, as evidenced by its lack of display outputs and dual-slot design.

For users choosing between these two, the decision hinges on the environment. The Quadro K5100M is the pick for mobile workstations or systems where power consumption and display output matter, given its MXM form factor and 100 W TDP. It also wins on raw performance metrics across the board. The Tesla M10 is the choice for dedicated compute servers where its PCIe form factor, higher clocks, and newer architecture may offer better compatibility with modern software stacks, particularly those leveraging Vulkan. The benchmark data, however, gives the overall edge to the Quadro K5100M based on its 14.1% OpenCL win and higher average score of 10,043 versus 9,724.