P104-100 vs Quadro 5010M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro 5010M with P104-100, including specs and performance data.
P104-100 outperforms 5010M by a whopping 114% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 679 | 478 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.03 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | GP104 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Release date | 22 February 2011 (13 years ago) | 12 December 2017 (7 years ago) |
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 | 384 | 1920 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 1607 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1733 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 7,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 21.60 | 208.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.6912 TFLOPS | 6.655 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 |
| TMUs | 48 | 120 |
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 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5X |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 650 MHz | 1251 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 320.3 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 2.0 | 6.1 |
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.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| 900p | 38
−111%
| 80−85
+111%
|
| Full HD | 59
−103%
| 120−130
+103%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−106%
|
35−40
+106%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
−100%
|
16−18
+100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−90.9%
|
21−24
+90.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
−105%
|
45−50
+105%
|
| Fortnite | 24−27
−100%
|
50−55
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−106%
|
35−40
+106%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
−100%
|
16−18
+100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−111%
|
80−85
+111%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
−114%
|
30−33
+114%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−100%
|
30−33
+100%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−90.9%
|
21−24
+90.9%
|
| World of Tanks | 70−75
−105%
|
150−160
+105%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
−105%
|
45−50
+105%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−106%
|
35−40
+106%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
−100%
|
16−18
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
−111%
|
80−85
+111%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−90.9%
|
21−24
+90.9%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−107%
|
60−65
+107%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| World of Tanks | 30−35
−110%
|
65−70
+110%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−100%
|
14−16
+100%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−106%
|
35−40
+106%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−87.5%
|
30−33
+87.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−100%
|
24−27
+100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−87.5%
|
30−33
+87.5%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−106%
|
35−40
+106%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
This is how Quadro 5010M and P104-100 compete in popular games:
- P104-100 is 111% faster in 900p
- P104-100 is 103% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.33 | 9.28 |
| Recency | 22 February 2011 | 12 December 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 16 nm |
P104-100 has a 114.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
The P104-100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 5010M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro 5010M is a mobile workstation card while P104-100 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
