Quadro K2100M vs Quadro 5000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 5000 with Quadro K2100M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 5000
2011
2.5 GB GDDR5, 152 Watt
5.02
+42.2%

5000 outperforms K2100M by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking630725
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.150.63
Power efficiency2.264.40
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF100GK106
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date23 February 2011 (13 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 $84.95

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K2100M has 320% better value for money than Quadro 5000.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores352576
Core clock speed513 MHz667 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)152 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate22.5732.02
Floating-point processing power0.7223 TFLOPS0.7684 TFLOPS
ROPs4016
TMUs4448

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2.5 GB2 GB
Memory bus width320 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed750 MHz752 MHz
Memory bandwidth120.0 GB/s48.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A+
CUDA2.0+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Quadro 5000 5.02
+42.2%
K2100M 3.53

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Quadro 5000 1934
+42.2%
K2100M 1360

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro 5000 7349
+61.8%
K2100M 4541

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Quadro 5000 31
+182%
K2100M 11

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD30−35
+30.4%
23
−30.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p83.303.69

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+0%
25
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how Quadro 5000 and K2100M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 5000 is 30% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.02 3.53
Recency 23 February 2011 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2.5 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 152 Watt 55 Watt

Quadro 5000 has a 42.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 25% higher maximum VRAM amount.

K2100M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 176.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 5000 is a workstation card while Quadro K2100M is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro 5000
Quadro 5000
NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
Quadro K2100M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.5 32 votes

Rate Quadro 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 280 votes

Rate Quadro K2100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.