
GeForce MX350 vs Quadro K5000M

GeForce MX350
Popular choices:

Quadro K5000M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce MX350 is positioned at rank 348 and the Quadro K5000M is on rank 50, so the Quadro K5000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce MX350
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce MX350 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2012). The GeForce MX350 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro K5000M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce MX350 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K5000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce MX350 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $200 versus $509 for the Quadro K5000M, it costs 61% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 156.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+156.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($200) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($509) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce MX350 and Quadro K5000M

GeForce MX350
The GeForce MX350 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 10 2020. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 747 MHz to 937 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 20W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,828 points.

Quadro K5000M
The Quadro K5000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 7 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 601 MHz. It has 1344 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,805 points. Launch price was $329.99.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce MX350 scores 2,828 and the Quadro K5000M reaches 2,805 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce MX350 is built on Pascal while the Quadro K5000M uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce MX350) vs 1,344 (Quadro K5000M). Raw compute: 1.199 TFLOPS (GeForce MX350) vs 1.615 TFLOPS (Quadro K5000M).
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,828 | 2,805 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 1344+110% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.199 TFLOPS | 1.615 TFLOPS+35% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 112+250% |
| L1 Cache | 240 KB+114% | 112 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce MX350 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K5000M has 4 GB. The Quadro K5000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce MX350 draws 20W versus the Quadro K5000M's 100W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce MX350 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce MX350) vs 350W (Quadro K5000M). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 20W-80% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 81°C |
| Perf/Watt | 141.4+403% | 28.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce MX350 costs 60.7% less ($309 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 14.1 (GeForce MX350) vs 5.5 (Quadro K5000M) — the GeForce MX350 offers 156.4% better value. The GeForce MX350 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce MX350 | Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $250 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200-61% | $509 |
| Performance per Dollar | 14.1+156% | 5.5 |
| Codename | GP107 | GK104 |
| Release | February 10 2020 | August 7 2012 |
| Ranking | #597 | #600 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











