Radeon Pro W6800 vs Quadro 5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 5000 and Radeon Pro W6800, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro 5000
2011
2.5 GB GDDR5, 152 Watt
5.01

Pro W6800 outperforms Quadro 5000 by a whopping 928% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking62851
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1425.10
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameGF100Navi 21
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date23 February 2011 (13 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 $2,249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro W6800 has 17829% better value for money than Quadro 5000.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3523840
Core clock speed513 MHz2075 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2320 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)152 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate22.57556.8
Floating-point performance0.7223 gflops17.82 gflops

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length248 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2.5 GB32 GB
Memory bus width320 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed3000 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth120.0 GB/s512.0 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 DisplayPort6x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA2.0-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 5.01
Pro W6800 51.51
+928%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 1933
Pro W6800 19877
+928%

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 HD14−16
−950%
147
+950%
1440p10−12
−970%
107
+970%
4K8−9
−988%
87
+988%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 277
+0%
277
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 225
+0%
225
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 268
+0%
268
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 157
+0%
157
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Hitman 3 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 179
+0%
179
+0%
Metro Exodus 55
+0%
55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 212
+0%
212
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 99
+0%
99
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 126
+0%
126
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how Quadro 5000 and Pro W6800 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 950% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 970% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 988% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.01 51.51
Recency 23 February 2011 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2.5 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 152 Watt 250 Watt

Quadro 5000 has 64.5% lower power consumption.

Pro W6800, on the other hand, has a 928.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1180% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 5000 in performance tests.


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 Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800

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 31 vote

Rate Quadro 5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 80 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 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.