Quadro P400 vs Quadro K5000M

Place in the ranking	537	672
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.16	3.06
Power efficiency	5.00	9.86
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	GK104	GP107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	7 August 2012 (12 years ago)	7 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$329.99	$119.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P400 has 42% better value for money than K5000M.

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	1344	256
Core clock speed	601 MHz	1228 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1252 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.31	20.03
Floating-point processing power	1.615 TFLOPS	0.641 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	112	16

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	145 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	750 MHz	1002 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	32.06 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

3x mini-DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API 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	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	+	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. 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.

K5000M 7.20
+69%

Quadro P400 4.26

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.

K5000M 2778
+69.1%

Quadro P400 1643

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.

K5000M 5107

Quadro P400 5620
+10%

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 HD

49
+81.5%

27−30

−81.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−12

+83.3%

6−7
−83.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +80%	10−11 −80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +75%	12−14 −75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +74.1%	27−30 −74.1%
Hitman 3	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +75%	24−27 −75%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +71.4%	14−16 −71.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +80%	30−33 −80%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +80%	10−11 −80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Battlefield 5	21−24 +75%	12−14 −75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +74.1%	27−30 −74.1%
Hitman 3	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +75%	24−27 −75%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +71.4%	14−16 −71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +80%	30−33 −80%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +80%	10−11 −80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +74.1%	27−30 −74.1%
Hitman 3	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +75%	24−27 −75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +71.4%	14−16 −71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +83.3%	12−14 −83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +80%	30−33 −80%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22
+100%

10−11

−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +85.7%	14−16 −85.7%
Hitman 3	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +70.4%	27−30 −70.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14

+71.4%

7−8
−71.4%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +91.7%	12−14 −91.7%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

This is how K5000M and Quadro P400 compete in popular games:

K5000M is 81% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.20	4.26
Recency	7 August 2012	7 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	30 Watt