Radeon Picasso vs Quadro 5000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking628not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.13no data
Power efficiency2.30no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGF100Picasso
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date23 February 2011 (13 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores352640
Core clock speed513 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1301 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)152 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate22.5752.04
Floating-point processing power0.7223 TFLOPS1.665 TFLOPS
ROPs408
TMUs4440

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length248 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2.5 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width320 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth120.0 GB/sno data

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.0-

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 152 Watt 10 Watt

Picasso has a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1420% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro 5000 and Radeon Picasso. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro 5000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon Picasso is a desktop 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
AMD Radeon Picasso
Radeon Picasso

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
4.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon Picasso 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.