NVIDIA Quadro K5100M vs NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition sit in entirely different classes of hardware, and the recorded data makes that gap obvious from the first glance. One is a mobile workstation MXM module built on Kepler at 28 nm; the other is a dual-slot desktop monster built on Volta at 12 nm with 640 tensor cores and 32 GB of HBM2 memory. The raw performance difference is enormous: 14.90 TFLOPS of FP32 on the TITAN V CEO Edition against 2.369 TFLOPS on the K5100M, a gap of more than six times in favor of the newer card. The database shows no shared benchmark runs between the two, so this comparison comes down to architecture, recorded scores in their respective tests, and the surrounding field of rivals each one competes against.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for this pairing, which is unsurprising given how different the two products are: a mobile professional module and a rare desktop halo card rarely appear in the same test suite. What the recorded data does provide is each card's own results and the average across its measured runs.

The Quadro K5100M posts a Geekbench Metal score of 8315 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 11771, averaging 10043 across the database. That average lands it in the 48th percentile of all GPUs, essentially the exact middle of the field. Its nearest rivals confirm this mid-pack positioning: the AMD Radeon R9 M375 averages 10070, just 0.3 percent higher; the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M averages 10013, 0.3 percent lower; the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M averages 9959, 0.8 percent below; and the NVIDIA Quadro 6000 averages 9846, 2 percent behind. These are razor-thin margins, and they define the K5100M as a card that trades blows with mainstream mobile and older desktop parts rather than competing at the top of any chart.

The TITAN V CEO Edition records a PassMark G3D score of 16988 and a PassMark G2D score of 1086, averaging 9037. Its percentile versus all GPUs is 45, slightly below the middle of the pack. Its listed rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 at 9022, only 0.2 percent behind, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 at 9058, 0.2 percent ahead, the AMD Radeon 550X at 8918, 1.3 percent below, and the AMD Radeon 890M at 9210, 1.9 percent ahead. That clustering is worth interpreting carefully: the averaged database scores pull the TITAN V CEO Edition toward these mainstream parts, yet its raw specifications, 14.90 TFLOPS FP32, 29.80 TFLOPS FP16, and 868.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, describe hardware far beyond that tier. The single PassMark G3D result of 16988 is the clearest indicator of its actual throughput in the recorded set.

Architecture Differences

The generational gap between these two cards is close to the widest NVIDIA has ever shipped. The K5100M uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 3540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The TITAN V CEO Edition uses the GV100 chip on Volta, built by TSMC on a 12 nm process, with 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die and a density of 25.9 million transistors per square millimeter. That is nearly six times the transistor count and more than double the density, on a die almost three times larger.

The core counts scale accordingly. The K5100M has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN V CEO Edition has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 128 ROPs. The K5100M has no tensor cores; the TITAN V CEO Edition has 640 of them, the hardware that drives its FP16 throughput of 29.80 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio against FP32. Neither card has RT cores, since both predate NVIDIA's dedicated ray tracing hardware.

Clocks also differ sharply. The K5100M runs a flat 771 MHz base and boost with memory at 900 MHz, 3.6 Gbps effective. The TITAN V CEO Edition runs 1200 MHz base and 1455 MHz boost with memory at 848 MHz, 1696 Mbps effective. The resulting rates are lopsided: 24.67 GPixel/s and 98.69 GTexel/s for the K5100M versus 186.2 GPixel/s and 465.6 GTexel/s for the TITAN V CEO Edition, roughly 7.5 times the pixel rate and 4.7 times the texture rate.

Memory subsystems could hardly be more different. The K5100M carries 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus for 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN V CEO Edition carries 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus for 868.4 GB/s, over seven times the bandwidth and four times the capacity. Form factor follows the same split: the K5100M is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) interface, 100 W TDP, no power connectors, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The TITAN V CEO Edition is a dual-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card, 267 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, with a 250 W TDP, one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, a suggested 600 W PSU, and one HDMI 2.0 plus three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

API support differs too. The K5100M reports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The TITAN V CEO Edition reports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, the newer feature level and Vulkan version both reflecting its more modern architecture. Both cards are end-of-life. The K5100M shipped in mid-2013, preceded by Quadro Fermi-M and succeeded by Quadro Maxwell-M. The TITAN V CEO Edition shipped in mid-2018, preceded by GeForce 900 and succeeded by GeForce 20.

FAQ

Q: Is there a direct benchmark between the Quadro K5100M and the TITAN V CEO Edition?

A: No. The database contains no shared test results for this pairing, since one is a mobile MXM workstation module and the other a desktop PCIe card. Comparison must rely on each card's own recorded scores, specifications, and rival clustering.

Q: Which card has more raw compute?

A: The TITAN V CEO Edition, by a wide margin. It delivers 14.90 TFLOPS FP32 and 29.80 TFLOPS FP16, against 2.369 TFLOPS FP32 on the K5100M, which lists no FP16 figure and has no tensor cores.

Q: How do their average database scores compare?

A: The K5100M averages 10043 and sits in the 48th percentile; the TITAN V CEO Edition averages 9037 and sits in the 45th percentile. The averages are close, but each is built from different test suites, so they are not directly comparable.

Q: Which memory configuration is bigger?

A: The TITAN V CEO Edition has 32 GB of HBM2 across a 4096-bit bus at 868.4 GB/s. The K5100M has 8 GB of GDDR5 across a 256-bit bus at 115.2 GB/s.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The K5100M is a 100 W MXM module with no external power connectors. The TITAN V CEO Edition is a 250 W dual-slot card needing one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector, with a suggested 600 W power supply.

Q: Which API support is newer?

A: The TITAN V CEO Edition supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, versus DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175 on the K5100M. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Verdict

The data points in one direction for performance and another for context. On every hardware measure recorded, the TITAN V CEO Edition is the stronger card: more than six times the FP32 compute, 640 tensor cores the K5100M lacks entirely, four times the memory capacity, over seven times the bandwidth, and pixel and texture fill rates several multiples higher. Anyone choosing between these two for GPU compute, memory-heavy workloads, or high-throughput rendering should take the TITAN V CEO Edition without hesitation, provided the platform can host a dual-slot PCIe card with its 250 W TDP and twin power connectors.

The K5100M makes sense only in its native context: an MXM-B (3.0) mobile workstation slot. Its 100 W envelope, module format, and portable-device-dependent outputs mean it is not an alternative to the TITAN in any desktop build. Within mobile professional hardware of its era, its average of 10043 and 48th percentile placement, alongside rivals within 2 percent either way, mark it as a solidly mid-field performer. Its predecessor was Quadro Fermi-M and its successor was Quadro Maxwell-M, placing it squarely in the middle of NVIDIA's mobile professional lineage.

Specification Differences

• Chip and architecture: GK104 on Kepler (K5100M) versus GV100 on Volta (TITAN V CEO Edition)
• Process node: 28 nm versus 12 nm, both from TSMC
• Transistors: 3540 million versus 21,100 million
• Die size and density: 294 mm² at 12.0M per mm² versus 815 mm² at 25.9M per mm²
• Clocks: 771 MHz base and boost versus 1200 MHz base and 1455 MHz boost; memory at 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) versus 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective)
• Memory: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit, 115.2 GB/s versus 32 GB HBM2, 4096-bit, 868.4 GB/s
• Shading units, TMUs, ROPs: 1536 / 128 / 32 versus 5120 / 320 / 128
• Tensor cores: none versus 640
• FP32 / FP16: 2.369 TFLOPS and unlisted versus 14.90 TFLOPS and 29.80 TFLOPS
• Fill rates: 24.67 GPixel/s and 98.69 GTexel/s versus 186.2 GPixel/s and 465.6 GTexel/s
• TDP and power: 100 W with no connectors versus 250 W with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin, 600 W PSU suggested
• Form factor: MXM Module, MXM-B (3.0) versus dual-slot PCIe 3.0 x16, 267 x 112 x 40 mm
• Outputs: portable device dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• APIs: DirectX 12 (11_0), Vulkan 1.2.175 versus DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.4
• Release lineage: 2013 Quadro Kepler-M generation versus 2018, between GeForce 900 and GeForce 20

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN V CEO Edition wins everywhere raw throughput matters. Its 14.90 TFLOPS FP32 and 29.80 TFLOPS FP16 with 640 tensor cores suit compute and mixed-precision workloads the K5100M simply cannot address. Its 32 GB of HBM2 at 868.4 GB/s wins any large-dataset or bandwidth-bound task. Its 16988 PassMark G3D score and fill rates of 186.2 GPixel/s and 465.6 GTexel/s make it the clear choice for rendering and graphics, and its newer Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12_1 support extends software compatibility further. Its fixed display outputs, one HDMI 2.0 and three DisplayPort 1.4a, also make it a multi-monitor desktop option.

The K5100M wins on integration and efficiency within its class. It fits an MXM-B (3.0) mobile slot, draws 100 W with no external connectors, and delivers its performance inside a notebook or compact workstation chassis where the TITAN's dual-slot, 250 W, dual-connector design cannot fit at all. Within that mobile arena, its average score of 10043 puts it marginally ahead of the Quadro 6000 and the GeForce GTX 870M, dead even with the Radeon Pro 5300M and Radeon R9 M375, a competitive standing for portable professional use. For anyone working in an MXM-based machine rather than a desktop tower, the K5100M remains the only one of these two that applies.