Radeon R7 240 vs Quadro M5000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M5000M with Radeon R7 240, including specs and performance data.

M5000M
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
18.17
+680%

M5000M outperforms R7 240 by a whopping 680% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking304850
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.16
Power efficiency12.465.32
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM204Oland
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$69

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores1,536320
Core clock speed975 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1051 MHz780 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate93.6014.00
Floating-point processing power2.995 TFLOPS0.448 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs9620

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneN/A

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
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1150 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s72 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+
Optimus+-
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.

DirectX12DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+-
CUDA5.2-

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.

M5000M 18.17
+680%
R7 240 2.33

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.

M5000M 7003
+681%
R7 240 897

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.

M5000M 9228
+656%
R7 240 1220

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 HD86
+760%
10−12
−760%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.90

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+743%
7−8
−743%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+800%
4−5
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+740%
5−6
−740%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+707%
14−16
−707%
Hitman 3 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+780%
10−11
−780%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+786%
7−8
−786%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+743%
7−8
−743%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+760%
10−11
−760%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+743%
7−8
−743%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+800%
4−5
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+740%
5−6
−740%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+707%
14−16
−707%
Hitman 3 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+780%
10−11
−780%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+786%
7−8
−786%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+743%
7−8
−743%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 126
+688%
16−18
−688%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+760%
10−11
−760%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+800%
4−5
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+740%
5−6
−740%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+707%
14−16
−707%
Hitman 3 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+780%
10−11
−780%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+743%
7−8
−743%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
+850%
4−5
−850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+760%
10−11
−760%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+717%
6−7
−717%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+950%
2−3
−950%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+717%
12−14
−717%
Hitman 3 21−24
+950%
2−3
−950%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+800%
4−5
−800%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+800%
12−14
−800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Hitman 3 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+820%
10−11
−820%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%

This is how M5000M and R7 240 compete in popular games:

  • M5000M is 760% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.17 2.33
Recency 18 August 2015 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 50 Watt

M5000M has a 679.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 240, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M5000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 240 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon R7 240 is a desktop 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 M5000M
Quadro M5000M
AMD Radeon R7 240
Radeon R7 240

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.


3.8 139 votes

Rate Quadro M5000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 1194 votes

Rate Radeon R7 240 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.