Radeon 780M vs Quadro K5200

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K5200 with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K5200
2014
8 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
15.33

780M outperforms K5200 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking356319
Place by popularitynot in top-10065
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.41no data
Power efficiency7.2382.69
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameGK110BHawx Point
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date22 July 2014 (10 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,699.74 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores2304768
Core clock speed667 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed771 MHz2700 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate148.0129.6
Floating-point processing power3.553 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs19248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1502 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth192.3 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 2x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA3.5-

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.

Quadro K5200 15.33
Radeon 780M 17.53
+14.4%

  • Passmark

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.

Quadro K5200 6127
Radeon 780M 7008
+14.4%

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 HD30−35
−20%
36
+20%
1440p18−20
−22.2%
22
+22.2%
4K10−12
−30%
13
+30%

Cost per frame, $

1080p56.66no data
1440p94.43no data
4K169.97no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 39
+0%
39
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 35
+0%
35
+0%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 82
+0%
82
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 31
+0%
31
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65
+0%
65
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 26
+0%
26
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+0%
15
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
+0%
18
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 15
+0%
15
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21
+0%
21
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how Quadro K5200 and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 780M is 20% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 780M is 22% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 780M is 30% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.33 17.53
Recency 22 July 2014 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 14.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K5200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K5200 is a workstation card while Radeon 780M is a notebook one.

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 K5200
Quadro K5200
AMD Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M

Other comparisons

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.


3.8
42 votes

Rate Quadro K5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2
1818 votes

Rate Radeon 780M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K5200 or Radeon 780M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.