Quadro K5000 vs Radeon R9 280

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Quadro K5000, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.40
+39.1%

R9 280 outperforms K5000 by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking360435
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.260.61
Power efficiency5.005.89
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTahitiGK104
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)17 August 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 762% better value for money than Quadro K5000.

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 cores17921536
Core clock speedno data706 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt122 Watt
Texture fill rate104.590.37
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS2.169 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs112128

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1350 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s172.8 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA-3.0

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.

R9 280 14.40
+39.1%
Quadro K5000 10.35

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.

R9 280 5557
+39.2%
Quadro K5000 3993

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.40 10.35
Recency 4 March 2014 17 August 2012
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 122 Watt

R9 280 has a 39.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

Quadro K5000, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 63.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K5000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while Quadro K5000 is a 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.


AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280
NVIDIA Quadro K5000
Quadro K5000

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.


3.6 384 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 92 votes

Rate Quadro K5000 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.