ATI Radeon HD 5870 vs Quadro 5000M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro 5000M with Radeon HD 5870, including specs and performance data.
ATI HD 5870 outperforms 5000M by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 627 | 610 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.60 |
| Power efficiency | 3.67 | 2.10 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | Cypress |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 27 July 2010 (14 years ago) | 23 September 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 cores | 320 | 1600 |
| Core clock speed | 405 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 2,154 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 188 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 16.20 | 68.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.5184 TFLOPS | 2.72 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 40 | 80 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 282 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 6-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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 153.6 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 Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−4.8%
|
65−70
+4.8%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
−4.7%
|
90−95
+4.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
−7.1%
|
45−50
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−5.9%
|
18−20
+5.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−4.8%
|
65−70
+4.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
−7.1%
|
45−50
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−4.8%
|
65−70
+4.8%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−5.3%
|
40−45
+5.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−2.9%
|
35−40
+2.9%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
−7.1%
|
60−65
+7.1%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−5.9%
|
18−20
+5.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−5.9%
|
18−20
+5.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.36 | 5.76 |
| Recency | 27 July 2010 | 23 September 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 188 Watt |
Quadro 5000M has an age advantage of 10 months, a 75% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 88% lower power consumption.
ATI HD 5870, on the other hand, has a 7.5% higher aggregate performance score.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro 5000M and Radeon HD 5870.
Be aware that Quadro 5000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon HD 5870 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
