GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs Quadro P5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
P104-100 P104-101 Quadro P4000 Quadro P5000 Tesla P4 Tesla P6
VS
MX570 MX570 A RTX 2050 Max-Q RTX 2050 Mobile RTX 3050 Max-Q RTX 3050 Max-Q Refresh 4 GB RTX 3050 Max-Q Refresh 6 GB RTX 3050 Mobile RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 4 GB RTX 3050 Mobile Refresh 6 GB RTX 3050 Ti Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5000 with GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5000
2016
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
32.86
+75.5%

P5000 outperforms RTX 2050 Mobile by an impressive 76% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro P5000 Quadro P5000
RTX 2050 Mobile RTX 2050

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking172307
Place by popularitynot in top-10029
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.25no data
Power efficiency12.5228.52
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGP104GA107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)17 December 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 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 cores20482048
Core clock speed1607 MHz1185 MHz
Boost clock speed1733 MHz1477 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate277.394.53
Floating-point processing power8.873 TFLOPS6.05 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16064
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 GB/s112.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+
Display Port1.4no data
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
VR Readyno data+
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA6.18.6
DLSS-+

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 HD93
+127%
41
−127%
1440p55−60
+61.8%
34
−61.8%
4K41
+57.7%
26
−57.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p26.87no data
1440p45.44no data
4K60.95no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+91.3%
45−50
−91.3%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+80.6%
36
−80.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+46.8%
47
−46.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+79.6%
49
−79.6%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+52.7%
70−75
−52.7%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+117%
30
−117%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+64.3%
42
−64.3%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+67.8%
59
−67.8%
Fortnite 140−150
+47.4%
95−100
−47.4%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+66.7%
70−75
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+81.6%
49
−81.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+84.8%
65−70
−84.8%
Valorant 190−200
+43%
130−140
−43%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+193%
30
−193%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+52.7%
70−75
−52.7%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+141%
27
−141%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+25%
220−230
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+138%
29
−138%
Dota 2 130−140
+14.4%
118
−14.4%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+86.8%
53
−86.8%
Fortnite 140−150
+47.4%
95−100
−47.4%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+66.7%
70−75
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+81.6%
45−50
−81.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+57.4%
68
−57.4%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+89.2%
35−40
−89.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+84.8%
65−70
−84.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 98
+69%
58
−69%
Valorant 190−200
+43%
130−140
−43%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+52.7%
70−75
−52.7%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+103%
30−35
−103%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+176%
25
−176%
Dota 2 130−140
+22.7%
110
−22.7%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+102%
49
−102%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+66.7%
70−75
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+170%
33
−170%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+84.8%
65−70
−84.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+60.6%
33
−60.6%
Valorant 190−200
+43%
130−140
−43%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+47.4%
95−100
−47.4%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+65.6%
120−130
−65.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+59.5%
37
−59.5%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+95.5%
21−24
−95.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+4.8%
160−170
−4.8%
Valorant 230−240
+35.3%
170−180
−35.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+64%
50−55
−64%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+94.6%
37
−94.6%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+88.6%
40−45
−88.6%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+68.8%
30−35
−68.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+92.5%
40−45
−92.5%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+71.4%
14−16
−71.4%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+90.6%
30−35
−90.6%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+92.9%
14−16
−92.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+44%
24−27
−44%
Valorant 180−190
+87.8%
95−100
−87.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+84.6%
24−27
−84.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Dota 2 90−95
+176%
34
−176%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+111%
18
−111%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+77.4%
30−35
−77.4%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+107%
14−16
−107%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+112%
16−18
−112%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+100%
18−20
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how Quadro P5000 and RTX 2050 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5000 is 127% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5000 is 62% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P5000 is 58% faster in 4K

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

  • in Atomic Heart, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P5000 is 193% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P5000 is ahead in 66 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 32.86 18.72
Recency 1 October 2016 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 45 Watt

Quadro P5000 has a 75.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 2050 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 122.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5000 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile 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 P5000
Quadro P5000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2050
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro P5000 Quadro P5000
vs
Pro 5700 XT Radeon Pro 5700 XT
RTX 2050 Mobile GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
vs
Arc A530M Arc A530M
Quadro P5000 Quadro P5000
vs
Pro VII Radeon Pro VII
GeForce 610M GeForce 610M
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs Graphics Xe 750 32EUs
HD 6850 AMD HD 6850
vs
Quadro K4000 K4000
GTX 980 NVIDIA 980
vs
RTX 3060 GA104 3060 GA104
FirePro M6100 FirePro M6100
vs
Quadro M500M M500M
Quadro K600 Quadro K600
vs
210 Rev. 2 210 Rev. 2
GeForce 6100 GeForce 6100
vs
Tesla S1075 S1075
HD 7310 AMD HD 7310
vs
ION 2 2
T2000 Max-Q NVIDIA T2000 Max-Q
vs
RTX 2050 Max-Q 2050 Max-Q
6800 GTO GeForce 6800 GTO
vs
Quadro4 550 XGL 550 XGL
GeForce4 4200 Go GeForce4 4200 Go
vs
A2

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 183 votes

Rate Quadro P5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2466 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P5000 or GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.