AMD Radeon RX 7800M vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive advantage for the AMD Radeon RX 7800M in the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD part scores 120,778 against the NVIDIA Quadro M5000's 29,481, a delta of -75.6% from the AMD perspective, meaning the Quadro trails by roughly three-quarters. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: AMD records 126,668 versus NVIDIA's 32,931, a -74% delta. These are not marginal differences; the RX 7800M delivers roughly four times the raw compute throughput in both APIs.

The average benchmark score in the database further confirms the gap, though it narrows the margin. The Quadro M5000 holds an average of 31,206, while the RX 7800M averages 27,883. Interestingly, the Quadro's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN RTX at 31,676 and the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell at 31,532, both within 1.5% of its score. The RX 7800M's nearest rivals, by contrast, are the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839), the Pro W5500X (27,973), the GTX 980 Ti (28,020), and the FirePro S7150 (28,117), all within a single percentage point. This suggests the average score is pulled down by the RX 7800M's wider benchmark suite, which includes several Passmark tests where it scores very low (e.g., Passmark DirectX 9 at 174, DirectX 10 at 99, and DirectX 12 at 89). In the head-to-head tests, however, the AMD part is overwhelmingly faster.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The Quadro M5000 uses the GM204 chip on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The RX 7800M uses the Navi 32 chip on RDNA 3.0, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, a density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. That is over six times the transistor density, which explains how AMD fits more than five times the transistor count into a smaller physical area.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The Quadro runs at a base of 861 MHz and boosts to 1038 MHz. The RX 7800M starts at 1295 MHz base, reaches 2335 MHz boost, and has a game clock of 2145 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the Quadro uses 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) while AMD runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). This feeds into the memory subsystems: the Quadro has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 211.6 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7800M has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, but the faster clock pushes bandwidth to 432.0 GB/s, double the Quadro's figure despite a narrower bus.

Compute resources are not remotely comparable. The Quadro has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 7800M has 3840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 60 ray tracing cores. The resulting pixel rate is 66.43 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 224.2 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rate is 132.9 GTexel/s versus 560.4 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 4.252 TFLOPS for the Quadro, while the RX 7800M reaches 35.87 TFLOPS, an eightfold difference. AMD also lists FP16 at 35.87 TFLOPS (1:1), while the Quadro has no FP16 figure recorded.

Power and physical design also separate them. The Quadro is a dual-slot card with a 150 W TDP, a 1x 6-pin power connector, a suggested PSU of 450 W, and PCIe 3.0 x16. It measures 267 mm long and 111 mm tall. The RX 7800M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 180 W TDP, no power connectors, and no listed dimensions; it uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 on the Quadro, while the RX 7800M is listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile integration. API support: both hit DirectX 12, but AMD supports 12 Ultimate (12_2) while NVIDIA reaches 12 (12_1). OpenGL is 4.6 for both, Vulkan 1.4 for both.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance in shared benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M wins both head-to-head tests decisively. Geekbench OpenCL shows AMD at 120,778 versus NVIDIA's 29,481, and Geekbench Vulkan shows AMD at 126,668 versus NVIDIA's 32,931.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The RX 7800M delivers 432.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The Quadro M5000 delivers 211.6 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. AMD has twice the bandwidth despite a narrower interface.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 7800M's 5 nm process yields 81.2 million transistors per square millimeter, versus the Quadro's 28 nm process at 13.1 million per square millimeter. That is roughly a 6x density advantage for AMD.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The Quadro M5000 is listed as end-of-life, released in 2015. The RX 7800M is active, released in 2024.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare?

A: The Quadro M5000 has a higher average at 31,206 versus 27,883 for the RX 7800M. However, this includes the RX 7800M's low Passmark scores, which drag its average down. In the two shared OpenCL and Vulkan tests, AMD is far ahead.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RX 7800M has 3840 shading units, nearly double the Quadro's 2048. It also has 240 TMUs versus 128, and 96 ROPs versus 64.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. For professional workstation tasks that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the AMD Radeon RX 7800M is the superior choice: it is 75.6% faster in OpenCL and 74% faster in Vulkan than the Quadro M5000. Its 35.87 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 432 GB/s bandwidth, and 12 GB VRAM make it a generationally stronger compute part.

However, the Quadro M5000 still holds a higher average benchmark score (31,206 vs 27,883) and sits at the 76th percentile versus the RX 7800M's 73rd. This reflects the Quadro's more consistent performance across a broader set of legacy tests, particularly the Passmark suite where the RX 7800M scores poorly (e.g., 99 in DirectX 10, 89 in DirectX 12). If your workload involves older DirectX 9/10/11 titles or 2D graphics, the Quadro's stability may serve better. The Quadro also has a lower TDP at 150 W versus 180 W, and it is a conventional dual-slot card with standard display outputs, making it easier to deploy in a desktop workstation.

The RX 7800M is an IGP, meaning it is designed for portable devices, not standalone desktop installation. Its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," and it has no power connectors. This makes it unsuitable for upgrading an existing desktop, but ideal for a laptop or all-in-one system where space and power delivery are integrated.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA Quadro M5000 | AMD Radeon RX 7800M |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 28,100 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 346 mm² |

| Base Clock | 861 MHz | 1295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz | 2335 MHz |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 211.6 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 3840 |

| TMUs | 128 | 240 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| RT Cores | None | 60 |

| FP32 | 4.252 TFLOPS | 35.87 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 150 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

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

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2015-06-28 | 2024-09-10 |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800M wins every shared compute benchmark and dominates in raw specifications. For OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, it is not close: 120,778 versus 29,481 and 126,668 versus 32,931 respectively. Its FP32 throughput is eight times higher (35.87 vs 4.252 TFLOPS), and its memory bandwidth is double (432 vs 211.6 GB/s). It also has more VRAM (12 GB vs 8 GB), a newer architecture, and ray tracing support. The RX 7800M is the clear winner for modern compute-heavy tasks, especially in a mobile or compact integrated platform.

The Quadro M5000 wins on average benchmark score (31,206 vs 27,883) and percentile ranking (76th vs 73rd). It also has a lower TDP (150 W vs 180 W), a conventional desktop form factor with standard display outputs, and a wider memory bus (256 bit vs 192 bit), though the bandwidth is lower. For legacy DirectX 9/10/11 workloads, the Passmark scores suggest the Quadro is far more capable: the RX 7800M scores 174, 99, and 176 in those three tests, while the Quadro's scores are not listed in the head-to-head, but its overall average being higher implies it does not suffer the same collapse. The Quadro also has a longer production history, being end-of-life but still present in the database with a strong average. If you need a drop-in desktop card for older software or a system that must stay within 150 W, the Quadro M5000 remains a viable choice. For anything modern, the RX 7800M is the data-backed pick.