GeForce GT 755M vs Quadro K5100M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K5100M with GeForce GT 755M, including specs and performance data.

K5100M
2013
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.20
+87.2%

K5100M outperforms GT 755M by an impressive 87% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking508668
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.726.11
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK104GK107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)25 June 2013 (11 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 cores1536384
Core clock speed771 MHz980 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate98.6931.36
Floating-point processing power2.369 TFLOPS0.7526 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12832

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1350 MHz
Memory bandwidth115.2 GB/s86.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI-+
HDCP content protection-+
Display Port1.2no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus++
3D Vision / 3DTV Play-+
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+1.1.126
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. 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.

K5100M 8.20
+87.2%
GT 755M 4.38

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.

K5100M 3162
+87.3%
GT 755M 1688

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

K5100M 6880
+146%
GT 755M 2801

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

K5100M 24795
+95.1%
GT 755M 12711

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

K5100M 4793
+128%
GT 755M 2106

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

K5100M 31015
+107%
GT 755M 14967

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.

K5100M 11427
+132%
GT 755M 4933

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

K5100M 33
+136%
GT 755M 14

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:

900p100−110
+78.6%
56
−78.6%
Full HD50
+117%
23
−117%
4K27
+92.9%
14−16
−92.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+91.7%
12−14
−91.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+96.3%
27−30
−96.3%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+58.6%
27−30
−58.6%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+29.5%
40−45
−29.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+91.7%
12−14
−91.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+96.3%
27−30
−96.3%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+58.6%
27−30
−58.6%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 82
+382%
16−18
−382%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+29.5%
40−45
−29.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+96.3%
27−30
−96.3%
Hitman 3 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+58.6%
27−30
−58.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+29.5%
40−45
−29.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%
Hitman 3 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+88.9%
27−30
−88.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Hitman 3 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

This is how K5100M and GT 755M compete in popular games:

  • K5100M is 79% faster in 900p
  • K5100M is 117% faster in 1080p
  • K5100M is 93% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the K5100M is 1350% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 755M is 21% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K5100M is ahead in 66 tests (99%)
  • GT 755M is ahead in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.20 4.38
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 50 Watt

K5100M has a 87.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GT 755M, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K5100M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 755M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K5100M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 755M is a mobile workstation 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 K5100M
Quadro K5100M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
GeForce GT 755M

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.


3.4 50 votes

Rate Quadro K5100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 76 votes

Rate GeForce GT 755M 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.