NVIDIA Quadro K5200 vs NVIDIA Quadro M3000M
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 8GB VRAM Quadro K5200 and 4GB VRAM Quadro M3000M to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro K5200 's Advantages
Boost Clock771MHz
More VRAM (8GB vs 4GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (192.3GB/s vs 160.4GB/s)
1280 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro M3000M 's Advantages
Released 1 years and 1 months late
Lower TDP (75W vs 150W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro K5200
+65%
3.553 TFLOPS
Quadro M3000M
2.15 TFLOPS
3DMark Time Spy
Quadro K5200
+2%
2072
Quadro M3000M
2016
3DMark Time Spy Extreme
Quadro K5200
941
Quadro M3000M
941
Graphics Card
Jul 2014
Release Date
Aug 2015
Quadro
Generation
Quadro Mobile
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16
Clock Speeds
667 MHz
Base Clock
-
771 MHz
Boost Clock
-
1502 MHz
Memory Clock
1253 MHz
Memory
8GB
Memory Size
4GB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR5
256bit
Memory Bus
256bit
192.3GB/s
Bandwidth
160.4GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
-
-
2304
Shading Units
1024
192
TMUs
64
48
ROPs
32
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L1 Cache
48 KB (per SMM)
-
L2 Cache
2 MB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
37.01 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
33.60 GPixel/s
148.0 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
67.20 GTexel/s
-
-
-
3.553 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
2.150 TFLOPS
148.0 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
67.20 GFLOPS
Board Design
150W
TDP
75W
450 W
Suggested PSU
-
2x DVI
2x DisplayPort 1.2
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
GK110B
GPU Name
GM204
-
GPU Variant
N16E-Q1-A1
Kepler
Architecture
Maxwell 2.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
28 nm
7.08 billion
Transistors
5.2 billion
561 mm²
Die Size
398 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_1)
DirectX
12 (12_1)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.1
Vulkan
1.3
3.5
CUDA
5.2
5.1
Shader Model
6.4
