Radeon Pro W5500M vs Quadro P5000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5000 with Radeon Pro W5500M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5000
2016
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
32.62
+263%

P5000 outperforms Pro W5500M by a whopping 263% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking164482
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.25no data
Power efficiency12.637.37
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameGP104Navi 14
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date1 October 2016 (8 years ago)10 February 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,499 no data

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 cores20481408
Core clock speed1607 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1733 MHz1450 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate277.3127.6
Floating-point processing power8.873 TFLOPS4.083 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16088

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1127 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth192 GB/s192.0 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 DisplayPortNo outputs
Display Port1.4no data

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
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.1-

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 P5000 32.62
+263%
Pro W5500M 8.99

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 P5000 12584
+263%
Pro W5500M 3469

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 HD96
+300%
24−27
−300%
4K39
+290%
10−12
−290%

Cost per frame, $

1080p26.03no data
4K64.08no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+289%
18−20
−289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+289%
27−30
−289%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+267%
18−20
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+300%
18−20
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+290%
21−24
−290%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+282%
45−50
−282%
Hitman 3 65−70
+278%
18−20
−278%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+303%
35−40
−303%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+300%
27−30
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+281%
21−24
−281%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+280%
30−33
−280%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+293%
30−33
−293%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+289%
18−20
−289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+289%
27−30
−289%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+267%
18−20
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+300%
18−20
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+290%
21−24
−290%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+282%
45−50
−282%
Hitman 3 65−70
+278%
18−20
−278%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+303%
35−40
−303%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+300%
27−30
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+281%
21−24
−281%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+280%
30−33
−280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+278%
18−20
−278%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+293%
30−33
−293%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70−75
+289%
18−20
−289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+267%
18−20
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+300%
18−20
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+282%
45−50
−282%
Hitman 3 65−70
+278%
18−20
−278%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+303%
35−40
−303%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+280%
30−33
−280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+279%
14−16
−279%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+293%
30−33
−293%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+281%
21−24
−281%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+281%
16−18
−281%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+308%
12−14
−308%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+280%
10−11
−280%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+270%
10−11
−270%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+272%
50−55
−272%
Hitman 3 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+283%
18−20
−283%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+281%
16−18
−281%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+317%
18−20
−317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+278%
45−50
−278%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+300%
8−9
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Hitman 3 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+298%
40−45
−298%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+300%
9−10
−300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+320%
10−11
−320%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%

This is how Quadro P5000 and Pro W5500M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5000 is 300% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5000 is 290% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 32.62 8.99
Recency 1 October 2016 10 February 2020
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 85 Watt

Quadro P5000 has a 262.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Pro W5500M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 17.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro W5500M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5000 is a workstation card while Radeon Pro W5500M is a mobile workstation 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 P5000
Quadro P5000
AMD Radeon Pro W5500M
Radeon Pro W5500M

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.


3.6 177 votes

Rate Quadro P5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W5500M 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.