NVIDIA Quadro M5000 vs NVIDIA T550 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a split decision between the NVIDIA T550 Mobile and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000, with each card claiming one victory in the two available tests. The T550 Mobile takes the Geekbench OpenCL test decisively, posting a score of 35,521 against the Quadro M5000's 29,481. That is a 20.5% advantage for the Turing-based mobile part, a substantial margin that suggests the newer architecture's compute capabilities translate directly into OpenCL performance gains. In practical terms, this means workloads that leverage OpenCL—such as certain rendering, simulation, or data-processing tasks—will see noticeably better throughput on the T550 Mobile.

The Quadro M5000 strikes back in the Geekbench Vulkan test, however, scoring 32,931 against the T550 Mobile's 30,801. The delta is 6.5% in favor of the Maxwell card, a smaller but still meaningful edge. Vulkan is a lower-level graphics API that often rewards raw rasterization throughput, and the M5000's larger memory bus and higher pixel rate appear to give it an advantage in this specific workload. The result is a 1-1 tie in head-to-head wins, making the choice between these two cards heavily dependent on which API or workload class matters more to the user.

Contextualizing these scores against their respective nearest rivals adds further nuance. The T550 Mobile's average benchmark score sits at 33,161, placing it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile, averages 33,170—a delta of 0%, effectively a statistical dead heat. The AMD Radeon Pro 570 trails by a negligible 0.1%, while the NVIDIA P104-100 and T600 Mobile sit 0.5% and 1% behind, respectively. This clustering indicates the T550 Mobile is tightly grouped with a set of capable mid-range mobile and workstation parts, none of which holds a commanding lead.

The Quadro M5000, by contrast, averages 31,206 overall, placing it in the 76th percentile. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q, scores 31,220 with a 0% delta, while the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits 0.4% ahead. Notably, the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell and TITAN RTX both score higher by 1% and 1.5% respectively, meaning the M5000 is slightly outpaced by some modern high-end parts despite its age. The overall picture is that the M5000 holds its own in its percentile bracket but does not dominate; the T550 Mobile's higher raw average score reflects its stronger OpenCL showing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA T550 Mobile wins decisively with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 35,521, which is 20.5% higher than the Quadro M5000's 29,481.

Q: Does the Quadro M5000 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Quadro M5000 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 32,931, beating the T550 Mobile's 30,801 by 6.5%.

Q: How do these cards compare to their closest rivals?

A: The T550 Mobile's average score of 33,161 is virtually tied with the GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile (33,170, 0% delta) and slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 570 (0.1% behind). The M5000's average of 31,206 is matched by the GRID M60-1Q (31,220, 0% delta) but trails the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell by 1%.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The T550 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Quadro M5000 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 211.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has the higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Quadro M5000 has a higher pixel rate at 66.43 GPixel/s, compared to the T550 Mobile's 53.28 GPixel/s.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life products?

A: Yes, both the T550 Mobile and the Quadro M5000 are listed as end-of-life production status.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural generations, which explains much of their benchmark behavior. The T550 Mobile is built on the Turing architecture, using the TU117 chip fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. This newer node packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. Turing introduced significant compute improvements over its predecessors, particularly in shader efficiency and workload scheduling, which aligns with the card's strong OpenCL showing.

The Quadro M5000, in contrast, uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip on a 28 nm process. Despite the older node, it contains 5,200 million transistors spread across a much larger 398 mm² die, resulting in a lower transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. Maxwell 2.0 was a refined architecture focused on power efficiency and raw throughput, but it lacks some of the compute-oriented enhancements that Turing brought. Notably, the M5000 has no FP16 support listed, while the T550 Mobile delivers 6.820 TFLOPS of FP16 performance via a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32.

The shading and texture resources also differ markedly. The T550 Mobile carries 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The M5000 more than doubles the shading units to 2,048, doubles the TMUs to 128, and doubles the ROPs to 64. This gives the M5000 a theoretical texture rate of 132.9 GTexel/s versus the T550 Mobile's 106.6 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 66.43 GPixel/s versus 53.28 GPixel/s. These raw resource advantages help explain the M5000's Vulkan victory, where higher rasterization throughput can dominate.

Neither card features ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so both rely purely on traditional shader-based rendering. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning API compatibility is identical even though the underlying architectures differ substantially.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds tell a story of contrasting design philosophies. The T550 Mobile runs a base clock of 1065 MHz and boosts to 1665 MHz, reflecting a mobile-oriented part that leverages higher frequencies on a smaller process. The Quadro M5000 operates at a lower 861 MHz base and 1038 MHz boost, likely constrained by its larger, older 28 nm die and higher power envelope. The memory clocks also diverge: the T550 Mobile uses 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective GDDR6, while the M5000 runs 1653 MHz with 6.6 Gbps effective GDDR5.

Memory capacity and bandwidth are major differentiators. The T550 Mobile offers only 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The M5000 provides 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 211.6 GB/s—more than double the bandwidth. This advantage is critical for large datasets, high-resolution textures, or multi-sample anti-aliasing, and it likely contributes to the M5000's Vulkan performance.

Power and physical specifications differ even more starkly. The T550 Mobile has a TDP of just 23 W, uses no power connectors, and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor with slot width listed as IGP. The M5000 draws 150 W, requires a 6-pin power connector, and is a dual-slot card with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The M5000's physical dimensions are 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, whereas the T550 Mobile's dimensions are not specified. The M5000 offers fixed display outputs of 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2, while the T550 Mobile's outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its mobile nature.

The M5000's release date is listed as June 28, 2015, while the T550 Mobile has no release date in the data. The M5000's predecessor is Quadro Kepler with a successor of Quadro Pascal, while the T550 Mobile's predecessor is Quadro Pascal-M and its successor is Ampere-MW. Both are end-of-life, but they hail from different era transitions in NVIDIA's professional lineup.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split recommendation based on workload priorities. The T550 Mobile is the superior choice for OpenCL-heavy compute tasks, delivering a 20.5% performance advantage that is hard to ignore. Its higher average benchmark score of 33,161 versus 31,206 also indicates better overall compute balance. For users running applications that heavily utilize OpenCL—such as certain scientific computing, video processing, or engineering simulation tools—the T550 Mobile is the data-backed winner.

The Quadro M5000, however, is the better option for Vulkan-based workloads and for tasks that demand high memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 8 GB frame buffer and 211.6 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the T550 Mobile's 4 GB and 96.00 GB/s, making it the obvious pick for large-scale rendering scenes, heavy texture workloads, or any scenario where memory pressure is a bottleneck. The 6.5% Vulkan win, while smaller than the T550 Mobile's OpenCL margin, still demonstrates a real advantage in that API.

Power consumption is another decisive factor. The T550 Mobile's 23 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for thin-and-light mobile workstations, while the M5000's 150 W draw, dual-slot design, and 450 W suggested PSU confine it to desktop towers. There is no price data available, so any consideration beyond raw specifications and benchmark scores must remain qualitative.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA T550 Mobile wins in OpenCL compute, with a 20.5% lead that suggests Turing's architectural improvements deliver tangible benefits in general-purpose GPU computing. Its higher boost clock of 1665 MHz and FP16 support (6.820 TFLOPS) make it well-suited for workloads that can leverage half-precision arithmetic. The 12 nm process and 23 W TDP also make it the clear choice for power-constrained environments or mobile chassis where thermal and power budgets are tight. Its average score places it in the 77th percentile, slightly above the M5000's 76th, reinforcing its overall compute edge.

NVIDIA Quadro M5000 wins in Vulkan rendering, leveraging its doubled shading units, TMUs, and ROPs to achieve a 6.5% advantage. The 8 GB memory capacity and 211.6 GB/s bandwidth are unmatched by the T550 Mobile, making it the better fit for high-resolution textures, large scene graphs, or multi-display configurations that exhaust smaller frame buffers. The dual-slot desktop form factor with four DisplayPort outputs and one DVI connector also gives it more flexible display connectivity for professional multi-monitor setups. Its 66.43 GPixel/s pixel rate and 132.9 GTexel/s texture rate are both higher than the T550 Mobile's, indicating stronger raw fill capabilities that benefit traditional rasterization.

In summary, the T550 Mobile is the compute-oriented, power-efficient mobile option, while the M5000 is the bandwidth-rich, fill-rate-focused desktop workstation card. Each wins in exactly one benchmark, and the choice hinges entirely on which API and workload profile matches the user's needs.