
GRID P40-24Q vs Quadro M5000M

GRID P40-24Q
Popular choices:

Quadro M5000M
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 GRID P40-24Q is positioned at rank 338 and the Quadro M5000M is on rank 13, so the Quadro M5000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID P40-24Q
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M5000M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GRID P40-24Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M5000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GRID P40-24Q remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 GRID P40-24Q and Quadro M5000M

GRID P40-24Q
The GRID P40-24Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,057 points.

Quadro M5000M
The Quadro M5000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 975 MHz to 1051 MHz. It has 1,536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,056 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID P40-24Q scores 7,057 and the Quadro M5000M reaches 7,056 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID P40-24Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro M5000M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 1 (Quadro M5000M). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P40-24Q) vs 2.995 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000M). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1051 MHz.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,057 | 7,056 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+33% | 1,536 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+61% | 2.995 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz+12% | 1051 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 128+33% | 96 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+33% | 576 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GRID P40-24Q comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M5000M has 8 GB. The Quadro M5000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 12.1 (Quadro M5000M). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.4+27% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (GRID P40-24Q) vs NVENC 5.0 (Quadro M5000M). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP7 vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GRID P40-24Q) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro M5000M).
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 4.0 | NVENC 5.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP7 | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID P40-24Q draws 225W versus the Quadro M5000M's 100W — a 76.9% difference. The Quadro M5000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P40-24Q) vs 350W (Quadro M5000M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GRID P40-24Q | Quadro M5000M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 100W-56% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 31.4 | 70.6+125% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











