Radeon RX 6500 XT vs Quadro M5000M

Place in the ranking	304	220
Place by popularity	not in top-100	83
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	58.69
Power efficiency	12.46	15.91
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	Navi 24
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$199

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 cores	1,536	1024
Core clock speed	975 MHz	2610 MHz
Boost clock speed	1051 MHz	2815 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	107 Watt
Texture fill rate	93.60	180.2
Floating-point processing power	2.995 TFLOPS	5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	96	64
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	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	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	2248 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	143.9 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	1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

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.

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.6
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	5.2	-

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

RX 6500 XT 24.83
+36.7%

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

RX 6500 XT 9569
+36.6%

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.

M5000M 11845

RX 6500 XT 22954
+93.8%

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

RX 6500 XT 15712
+70.3%

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.

M5000M 63738

RX 6500 XT 91909
+44.2%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

M5000M 324161

RX 6500 XT 356129
+9.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

M5000M 71

RX 6500 XT 111
+55%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

M5000M 103

RX 6500 XT 140
+35.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

M5000M 88
+1.2%

RX 6500 XT 87

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

M5000M 97

RX 6500 XT 150
+55.1%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

M5000M 82

RX 6500 XT 91
+11.1%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

M5000M 32

RX 6500 XT 58
+78.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

M5000M 44

RX 6500 XT 67
+52.2%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

M5000M 7

RX 6500 XT 60
+744%

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	86 +38.7%	62 −38.7%
1440p	18−21 −55.6%	28 +55.6%
4K	10−12 −60%	16 +60%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	3.21
1440p	no data	7.11
4K	no data	12.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

27−30

−157%

72
+157%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −35%	50−55 +35%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 −70%	51 +70%
Battlefield 5	55−60 −37.3%	80−85 +37.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −38.9%	50−55 +38.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −92.9%	54 +92.9%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −35.7%	55−60 +35.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −35.4%	65−70 +35.4%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −28.3%	140−150 +28.3%
Hitman 3	35−40 −42.9%	50−55 +42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −29.5%	110−120 +29.5%
Metro Exodus	60−65 −37.1%	85−90 +37.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −30.6%	60−65 +30.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 −42.4%	80−85 +42.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −19.8%	100−110 +19.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −35%	50−55 +35%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 −43.3%	43 +43.3%
Battlefield 5	55−60 −37.3%	80−85 +37.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −38.9%	50−55 +38.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −21.4%	34 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −35.7%	55−60 +35.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −35.4%	65−70 +35.4%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −28.3%	140−150 +28.3%
Hitman 3	35−40 −42.9%	50−55 +42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −29.5%	110−120 +29.5%
Metro Exodus	60−65 −37.1%	85−90 +37.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −30.6%	60−65 +30.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 −81.4%	107 +81.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	126 +138%	50−55 −138%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −19.8%	100−110 +19.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −35%	50−55 +35%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−33 −3.3%	31 +3.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −38.9%	50−55 +38.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −7.1%	30 +7.1%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −35.7%	55−60 +35.7%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −28.3%	140−150 +28.3%
Hitman 3	35−40 −42.9%	50−55 +42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −4.5%	92 +4.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55−60 −40.7%	83 +40.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	38 −42.1%	54 +42.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +244%	25 −244%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50

−30.6%

60−65
+30.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −34.3%	45−50 +34.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −40.7%	35−40 +40.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 −44.4%	24−27 +44.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −43.8%	23 +43.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 −40%	27−30 +40%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −70%	17 +70%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −33.3%	27−30 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 −43.9%	140−150 +43.9%
Hitman 3	21−24 −38.1%	27−30 +38.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −83.3%	66 +83.3%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −72.7%	57 +72.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −60%	56 +60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −50%	30−33 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	100−110 −29.6%	140−150 +29.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−33

−36.7%

40−45
+36.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −33.3%	24−27 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −46.2%	18−20 +46.2%
Hitman 3	12−14 +30%	10 −30%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 −38%	120−130 +38%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −47.4%	27−30 +47.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −55.6%	28 +55.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +50%	6 −50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −40%	14−16 +40%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −41.7%	30−35 +41.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −31.6%	25 +31.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −42.9%	10 +42.9%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−31.3%

21−24
+31.3%

This is how M5000M and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:

M5000M is 39% faster in 1080p
RX 6500 XT is 56% faster in 1440p
RX 6500 XT is 60% faster in 4K

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the M5000M is 244% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6500 XT is 157% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

M5000M is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
RX 6500 XT is ahead in 68 tests (94%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.17	24.83
Recency	18 August 2015	19 January 2022
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	107 Watt

M5000M has 7% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 36.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M5000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M5000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6500 XT is a desktop one.

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