NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 vs NVIDIA TITAN Xp Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data separates these two NVIDIA cards into distinct performance profiles. The Quadro RTX 5000 takes the lead in compute-oriented API tests, while the TITAN Xp dominates the legacy DirectX and 2D workloads. Out of nine head-to-head benchmarks, the TITAN Xp wins seven, but the Quadro RTX 5000 wins the two most modern tests.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro RTX 5000 scores 78,999 against the TITAN Xp's 72,585, a difference of 8.8%. The Vulkan result follows the same direction: 92,309 for the Quadro versus 87,180 for the TITAN Xp, a 5.9% margin. These are the only two wins for the Quadro, and they represent the workloads that align with its Turing architecture's newer feature set.

The TITAN Xp's wins are decisive in the Passmark suite. The largest gap appears in Passmark GPU Compute, where the TITAN Xp scores 9,430 against 6,525 for the Quadro, a 30.8% advantage. Passmark G3D shows the TITAN Xp at 18,750 versus 15,616, a 16.7% lead. DirectX 12 results favor the TITAN Xp by 14.5% (69 versus 59), and DirectX 9 favors it by 13.7% (226 versus 195). The smaller margins appear in DirectX 10 (119 versus 113, a 5% lead) and DirectX 11 (152 versus 140, a 7.9% lead). The 2D test, Passmark G2D, shows 883 for the TITAN Xp against 709 for the Quadro, a 19.7% difference.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split. The Quadro RTX 5000 holds an average score of 21,629, which places it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The TITAN Xp's average is 19,177, placing it in the 64th percentile. The Quadro's nearest rivals in the database include the GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB at 21,856 (1% higher), the RTX A4000 Mobile at 21,379 (1.2% lower), and the Radeon HD 8970M at 21,237 (1.8% lower). The TITAN Xp's nearest rivals sit much closer: the GeForce GTX 780 at 19,164 (0.1% higher), the Tesla K20m at 19,089 (0.5% higher), and the RTX 4050 Mobile at 19,049 (0.7% higher).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 chip on a 12 nm process at TSMC, with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. The TITAN Xp uses the GP102 chip on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC, with 11,800 million transistors on a 471 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical: 25.0 million per mm² for the Quadro and 25.1 million per mm² for the TITAN Xp.

The Quadro RTX 5000 belongs to the Turing architecture generation, while the TITAN Xp belongs to Pascal. This difference shows up in the feature set. The Quadro includes 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, both of which are absent from the TITAN Xp. The shading unit counts differ as well: the Quadro has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The TITAN Xp has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The TITAN Xp's higher raw counts explain its advantage in pixel rate (151.9 GPixel/s versus 116.2 GPixel/s) and texture rate (379.7 GTexel/s versus 348.5 GTexel/s).

Memory configurations also diverge. The Quadro RTX 5000 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN Xp uses 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 547.6 GB/s. The TITAN Xp's wider bus gives it more bandwidth despite the older memory type. Clock speeds show the Quadro's newer process advantage: it runs at 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost, while the TITAN Xp runs at 1405 MHz base and 1582 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the Quadro and 1426 MHz (11.4 Gbps effective) for the TITAN Xp.

The FP32 compute figures are close: 11.15 TFLOPS for the Quadro and 12.15 TFLOPS for the TITAN Xp. The FP16 numbers tell a different story. The Quadro RTX 5000 delivers 22.30 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the TITAN Xp manages only 189.8 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio. This is a direct consequence of the tensor cores on the Turing chip, which accelerate half-precision work.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split in workload suitability. The TITAN Xp wins the majority of the benchmark suite, including the compute-heavy Passmark GPU Compute test by a 30.8% margin. Its higher shading unit count, texture rate, and pixel rate give it an edge in rasterization and legacy DirectX workloads. For users running DirectX 9 through DirectX 12 applications, the TITAN Xp is the stronger choice based on the recorded scores.

The Quadro RTX 5000 wins in the two most modern API tests. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 8.8% higher, and its Vulkan score is 5.9% higher. The presence of RT cores and tensor cores in the Turing architecture positions it for ray tracing and AI-accelerated tasks, though the benchmark data does not directly measure those workloads. The Quadro also offers 16 GB of memory versus 12 GB, which matters for larger datasets.

The average benchmark score favors the Quadro at 21,629 versus 19,177, a difference of about 12.8%. This average weights all tests equally, so the Quadro's two wins in modern APIs are balanced against the TITAN Xp's seven wins in the older suite. The percentile ranks reflect this: 67th for the Quadro, 64th for the TITAN Xp.

Specification Differences

The key differences between the two cards are as follows. The Quadro RTX 5000 uses the TU104 chip on a 12 nm process, while the TITAN Xp uses the GP102 chip on a 16 nm process. Transistor counts are 13,600 million versus 11,800 million, and die sizes are 545 mm² versus 471 mm². The Quadro has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs; the TITAN Xp has 3,840 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The Quadro includes 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores; the TITAN Xp has none.

Memory differs in size, type, bus width, and bandwidth. The Quadro has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN Xp has 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 547.6 GB/s bandwidth. Clock speeds are 1620 MHz base and 1815 MHz boost for the Quadro, versus 1405 MHz base and 1582 MHz boost for the TITAN Xp. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1426 MHz (11.4 Gbps effective).

Power and physical characteristics differ slightly. The Quadro has a 230 W TDP with a 550 W suggested PSU; the TITAN Xp has a 250 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU. Both are dual-slot cards with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16. The Quadro is 267 mm long and 111 mm high; the TITAN Xp is 267 mm long, 112 mm high, and 40 mm wide. Display outputs differ: the Quadro has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C, while the TITAN Xp has 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. API support shows the Quadro with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and the TITAN Xp with DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The TITAN Xp has 547.6 GB/s of bandwidth from its 384-bit bus and GDDR5X memory. The Quadro RTX 5000 has 448.0 GB/s from a 256-bit bus and GDDR6 memory.

Q: Does the TITAN Xp support ray tracing?

A: No. The TITAN Xp is based on the Pascal architecture and has no RT cores. The Quadro RTX 5000 includes 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores.

Q: Which card performs better in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The Quadro RTX 5000 scores 92,309 in Geekbench Vulkan, compared to 87,180 for the TITAN Xp, a 5.9% advantage.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two cards?

A: The Passmark GPU Compute test shows the TITAN Xp ahead by 30.8%, with a score of 9,430 versus 6,525 for the Quadro RTX 5000.

Q: How do the average scores compare?

A: The Quadro RTX 5000 has an average benchmark score of 21,629, placing it in the 67th percentile. The TITAN Xp averages 19,177, placing it in the 64th percentile.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The TITAN Xp has 3,840 shading units, while the Quadro RTX 5000 has 3,072. The TITAN Xp also has more texture units (240 versus 192) and ROPs (96 versus 64).

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN Xp wins in the legacy DirectX and 2D workloads. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 226 is 13.7% higher than the Quadro's 195. DirectX 12 shows a 14.5% advantage (69 versus 59), DirectX 11 a 7.9% advantage (152 versus 140), and DirectX 10 a 5% advantage (119 versus 113). The 2D test shows the largest relative gap in this group at 19.7% (883 versus 709). The compute test is the TITAN Xp's biggest win at 30.8%, and the overall 3D score (Passmark G3D) favors it by 16.7% (18,750 versus 15,616).

The Quadro RTX 5000 wins in the modern API tests. Geekbench OpenCL shows an 8.8% advantage (78,999 versus 72,585), and Geekbench Vulkan shows a 5.9% advantage (92,309 versus 87,180). These two tests are the only ones where the Quadro comes out ahead, but they represent the direction of newer software. The Quadro also holds a higher average benchmark score and a higher percentile rank, despite losing the majority of individual tests.

For users choosing between these two, the data suggests a workflow-based decision. Applications that rely on DirectX 9 through 12, 2D rendering, or general-purpose compute as measured by Passmark will see better results on the TITAN Xp. Applications that use Vulkan or OpenCL, or that can take advantage of 16 GB of memory for larger working sets, will favor the Quadro RTX 5000. The Quadro's RT and tensor cores provide architectural support for ray tracing and half-precision workloads, but the benchmark data does not include direct measurements of those capabilities.