Radeon RX 7600 XT vs Quadro M5000M

Place in the ranking	304	80
Place by popularity	not in top-100	83
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	76.87
Power efficiency	12.60	16.19
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GM204	Navi 33
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	18 August 2015 (9 years ago)	8 January 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$329

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	2048
Core clock speed	975 MHz	1980 MHz
Boost clock speed	1051 MHz	2755 MHz
Number of transistors	5,200 million	13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	93.60	352.6
Floating-point processing power	2.995 TFLOPS	22.57 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	96	128
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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 x8
Length	no data	204 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 8-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	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	288.0 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 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
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	6.7
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 18.31

RX 7600 XT 44.68
+144%

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 7038

RX 7600 XT 17177
+144%

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

−133%

200−210
+133%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

1.65

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Elden Ring	55−60 −128%	130−140 +128%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 −137%	140−150 +137%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 −137%	180−190 +137%
Metro Exodus	50−55 −140%	120−130 +140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −133%	100−105 +133%
Valorant	70−75 −143%	180−190 +143%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 −137%	140−150 +137%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Dota 2	65−70 −131%	150−160 +131%
Elden Ring	55−60 −128%	130−140 +128%
Far Cry 5	60−65 −138%	150−160 +138%
Fortnite	95−100 −142%	240−250 +142%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 −137%	180−190 +137%
Grand Theft Auto V	65−70 −131%	150−160 +131%
Metro Exodus	50−55 −140%	120−130 +140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 −138%	300−310 +138%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −133%	100−105 +133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 −128%	130−140 +128%
Valorant	70−75 −143%	180−190 +143%
World of Tanks	220−230 −127%	500−550 +127%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 −137%	140−150 +137%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −134%	75−80 +134%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 −136%	85−90 +136%
Dota 2	65−70 −131%	150−160 +131%
Far Cry 5	60−65 −138%	150−160 +138%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80 −137%	180−190 +137%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 −138%	300−310 +138%
Valorant	70−75 −143%	180−190 +143%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%
Elden Ring	30−33 −133%	70−75 +133%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −141%	70−75 +141%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 −141%	400−450 +141%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
World of Tanks	120−130 −140%	300−310 +140%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −143%	90−95 +143%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −133%	35−40 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −129%	110−120 +129%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 −139%	110−120 +139%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −144%	100−105 +144%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −129%	55−60 +129%
Valorant	45−50 −134%	110−120 +134%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Dota 2	30−35 −142%	75−80 +142%
Elden Ring	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −142%	75−80 +142%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 −136%	130−140 +136%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −125%	27−30 +125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −142%	75−80 +142%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Dota 2	30−35 −142%	75−80 +142%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −139%	55−60 +139%
Fortnite	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −141%	65−70 +141%
Valorant	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%

This is how M5000M and RX 7600 XT compete in popular games:

RX 7600 XT is 133% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.31	44.68
Recency	18 August 2015	8 January 2024
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	190 Watt

M5000M has 90% lower power consumption.

RX 7600 XT, on the other hand, has a 144% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7600 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 7600 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.