RTX A2000 vs Quadro M5000

Place in the ranking	230	139
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.09	85.99
Power efficiency	11.10	34.81
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	GA106
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	29 June 2015 (9 years ago)	10 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$2,856.99	$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX A2000 has 2683% better value for money than Quadro M5000.

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	2048	3328
Core clock speed	861 MHz	562 MHz
Boost clock speed	1038 MHz	1200 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	132.9	124.8
Floating-point processing power	4.252 TFLOPS	7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	48
TMUs	128	104
Tensor Cores	no data	104
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	26

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	167 mm
Width	2" (5.1 cm)	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin	None
SLI options	+	-

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	256 Bit	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1653 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 211 GB/s	288.0 GB/s

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	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
Multi-display synchronization	Quadro Sync	no data

Supported technologies

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

ECC (Error Correcting Code)	+	no data
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
High-Performance Video I/O6	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.8
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	5.2	8.6

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.

Quadro M5000 24.29

RTX A2000 35.54
+46.3%

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 M5000 9360

RTX A2000 13695
+46.3%

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.

Quadro M5000 29510

RTX A2000 73276
+148%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Quadro M5000 32925

RTX A2000 68574
+108%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro M5000 24565

RTX A2000 84002
+242%

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	60−65 −56.7%	94 +56.7%
1440p	30−35 −46.7%	44 +46.7%
4K	18−20 −55.6%	28 +55.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	47.62	4.78
1440p	95.23	10.20
4K	158.72	16.04

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.29	35.54
Recency	29 June 2015	10 August 2021
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	70 Watt

Quadro M5000 has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX A2000, on the other hand, has a 46.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M5000 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.