NVIDIA Quadro K5200 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The two NVIDIA workstation cards occupy entirely different performance strata, and the recorded benchmark data makes that clear. The Quadro K5200 shows its strength in compute-oriented workloads, specifically OpenCL and Vulkan, where it posts scores of 19,024 and 20,180 respectively. These numbers place it in the 64th percentile of all GPUs in the database, meaning it sits above the typical workstation card of its generation.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, by contrast, has only a single recorded benchmark result, a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 16,408. This is a modern workload that stresses ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate features, areas where the older Kepler architecture cannot compete at all. The RTX PRO 6000 lands in the 59th percentile, slightly below the K5200's percentile ranking, but this is misleading because the two cards were tested under completely different benchmark suites.

The data implies a generational divide rather than a direct head-to-head contest. The K5200 wins in legacy API compute tests, while the RTX PRO 6000 wins in modern DX12 workloads. For users running older OpenCL-based professional applications, the K5200's scores suggest it remains serviceable. For anyone working with current DX12 titles or modern rendering pipelines, the RTX PRO 6000 is the only one of the two that appears in that benchmark category at all.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs spans over a decade of NVIDIA design evolution. The Quadro K5200 uses the GK110B chip built on Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,080 million transistors onto a 561 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. This is a purely rasterization-focused design with 2,304 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. It has no dedicated ray tracing cores and no tensor cores, reflecting its 2014-era design priorities.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell uses the GB202 chip on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also built by TSMC but on a 5 nm process. The transistor count jumps to 92,200 million on a 750 mm² die, reaching a density of 122.9 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a massive increase in complexity and capability. The shading unit count rises to 24,064, with 752 TMUs and 192 ROPs. Critically, it adds 188 ray tracing cores and 752 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI processing that the K5200 simply cannot perform.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The K5200 runs at 667 MHz base and 771 MHz boost, while the RTX PRO 6000 operates at 1,590 MHz base and 2,617 MHz boost. Memory technology also diverges sharply: the K5200 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the RTX PRO 6000 has 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The newer card's memory system offers nearly ten times the bandwidth and twelve times the capacity.

The FP32 compute figures illustrate the scale of the leap. The K5200 delivers 3.553 TFLOPS, while the RTX PRO 6000 reaches 126.0 TFLOPS, a 35-fold increase. The RTX PRO 6000 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, another 126.0 TFLOPS, which the K5200 lacks entirely. Pixel rate jumps from 37.01 GPixel/s to 502.5 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 148.0 GTexel/s to 1,968.0 GTexel/s.

Bus interface and display outputs also differ. The K5200 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 with 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The RTX PRO 6000 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 with 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. The newer card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the older card maxes out at DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Verdict

The database points to a straightforward conclusion for most users: the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is the superior card by every modern metric, but it is not a direct replacement for the K5200 in legacy environments. The K5200 remains relevant only for specific older workloads that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan 1.2, where its scores of 19,024 and 20,180 indicate it can still handle compute tasks competently.

For anyone working with DX12 Ultimate content, ray tracing, tensor-based AI workloads, or large memory footprints, the RTX PRO 6000 is the clear choice. Its 96 GB of GDDR7 memory dwarfs the K5200's 8 GB, and its 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores enable capabilities the Kepler card cannot approximate. The 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 performance is in a different league entirely.

The K5200's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD FirePro D300 at 19,637 average score, only 0.2% ahead, and the Radeon RX 6650 XT at 19,765, 0.8% ahead. It also edges out the Radeon RX 7900 XTX by 1% and the GTX 1060 3 GB by 1.4%. These margins are small, indicating the K5200 holds its own among older and mid-range cards in compute tests.

The RTX PRO 6000's nearest rivals show a tighter cluster: the Radeon PRO W7500 sits at 16,415, essentially tied, the RX 5700 XT is 0.3% behind, and the Pro 5600M is 0.4% behind. The RTX 5090 D V2 leads by 0.6%. This suggests the RTX PRO 6000 is competitive with a range of modern cards in its tested workload, despite its high-end positioning.

The verdict is clear: if the workload involves modern APIs and features, the RTX PRO 6000 is the only viable option between the two. If the workload is locked to legacy compute APIs, the K5200 still functions, but its end-of-life production status means support and reliability are diminishing.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better OpenCL performance?

A: The Quadro K5200 scores 19,024 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is its only recorded compute benchmark. The RTX PRO 6000 has no OpenCL result in the database, so a direct comparison is not possible from recorded data.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The K5200 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the RTX PRO 6000 has 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus. The newer card also provides 1.79 TB/s bandwidth versus 192.3 GB/s.

Q: Does the RTX PRO 6000 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 188 dedicated ray tracing cores. The K5200 has no RT cores at all, so hardware ray tracing is unsupported.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The K5200 has a 150 W TDP with a 450 W suggested PSU and a single 6-pin connector. The RTX PRO 6000 has a 600 W TDP with a 1000 W suggested PSU and a single 16-pin connector.

Q: Which card supports newer display outputs?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 has 4x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the K5200 has 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The newer card also uses PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16.

Q: How do the FP32 compute capabilities compare?

A: The K5200 delivers 3.553 TFLOPS, while the RTX PRO 6000 delivers 126.0 TFLOPS. The newer card also offers FP16 at 126.0 TFLOPS, which the K5200 does not support.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two cards, so the comparison relies on their individual recorded scores across different test suites. The K5200 has results in Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, while the RTX PRO 6000 has only a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score.

The K5200's OpenCL score of 19,024 places it just 0.2% behind the AMD FirePro D300's 19,637 average, and 0.8% behind the Radeon RX 6650 XT's 19,765. It actually outperforms the Radeon RX 7900 XTX by 1% and the GTX 1060 3 GB by 1.4%. These narrow margins suggest the K5200 is competitive with a wide range of cards in compute tasks, even some much newer ones.

In Vulkan, the K5200 scores 20,180, which is higher than its OpenCL result. This indicates the card handles Vulkan 1.2 workloads slightly better than OpenCL in the recorded tests. The average benchmark score across both tests is 19,602.

The RTX PRO 6000's single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 16,408 sits in a tight competitive cluster. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 matches it at 16,415, a 0% delta. The RX 5700 XT trails by 0.3% at 16,361, and the Pro 5600M trails by 0.4% at 16,351. The RTX 5090 D V2 leads by 0.6% with a score of 16,504.

These numbers reveal that the RTX PRO 6000, despite being a top-tier professional card, posts a DX12 score that is comparable to mid-range and older consumer cards. This may reflect the benchmark's specific workload rather than the card's overall capability. The K5200, meanwhile, shows strong performance in legacy compute tests but has no DX12 result at all, limiting its modern usability.

The biggest wins for the K5200 are in OpenCL and Vulkan, where it scores above 19,000. The biggest win for the RTX PRO 6000 is its existence in the DX12 benchmark category, where the K5200 has no recorded presence. In raw compute throughput, the RTX PRO 6000's 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 dwarfs the K5200's 3.553 TFLOPS, but the benchmark scores do not directly reflect this because they use different test methodologies.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The process node moves from 28 nm on the K5200 to 5 nm on the RTX PRO 6000. Transistor count rises from 7,080 million to 92,200 million, and die size grows from 561 mm² to 750 mm². Transistor density increases from 12.6M per mm² to 122.9M per mm².

Clock speeds show the K5200 at 667 MHz base and 771 MHz boost, while the RTX PRO 6000 runs at 1,590 MHz base and 2,617 MHz boost. Memory clocks differ as well: 1502 MHz with 6 Gbps effective on the K5200 versus 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective on the RTX PRO 6000.

Memory capacity jumps from 8 GB to 96 GB, type changes from GDDR5 to GDDR7, bus width doubles from 256 bit to 512 bit, and bandwidth increases from 192.3 GB/s to 1.79 TB/s. Shading units go from 2,304 to 24,064, TMUs from 192 to 752, and ROPs from 48 to 192. The RTX PRO 6000 adds 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores, both absent from the K5200.

Pixel rate rises from 37.01 GPixel/s to 502.5 GPixel/s, texture rate from 148.0 GTexel/s to 1,968.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 from 3.553 TFLOPS to 126.0 TFLOPS. The RTX PRO 6000 also has FP16 at 126.0 TFLOPS, which the K5200 does not list.

TDP increases from 150 W to 600 W, power connectors change from 1x 6-pin to 1x 16-pin, and suggested PSU rises from 450 W to 1000 W. Bus interface moves from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs change from 2x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 to 4x DisplayPort 2.1b.

API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan versions: the K5200 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the RTX PRO 6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Physical dimensions grow from 267 mm length and 111 mm height to 304 mm length and 137 mm height, with the RTX PRO 6000 also listing a 40 mm width. Production status differs: the K5200 is end-of-life, while the RTX PRO 6000 is active. Release dates are 2014-07-21 for the K5200 and 2025-03-17 for the RTX PRO 6000. The RTX PRO 6000 has a launch MSRP of 8,565 USD.