Intel Arc Pro A60 vs Quadro M5000
Intel Arc Pro A60
Popular choices:
Quadro M5000
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 Intel Arc Pro A60 is positioned at rank 60 and the Quadro M5000 is on rank 147, so the Intel Arc Pro A60 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Intel Arc Pro A60
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M5000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Intel Arc Pro A60 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2015). The Intel Arc Pro A60 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro M5000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Intel Arc Pro A60 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M5000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.9%) |
| Longevity | Generation 12.7 (2022−2023) (6nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro M5000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $120 versus $380 for the Intel Arc Pro A60, it costs 68% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 213.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+213.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($380) | ✅More affordable ($120) |
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 Intel Arc Pro A60 and Quadro M5000
Intel Arc Pro A60
The Intel Arc Pro A60 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in June 6 2023. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 2050 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,493 points.
Quadro M5000
The Quadro M5000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 29 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 861 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,406 points. Launch price was $2,856.99.
Graphics Performance
The Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 9,493 and the Quadro M5000 reaches 9,406 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Intel Arc Pro A60 is built on Generation 12.7 while the Quadro M5000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 6 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs 2,048 (Quadro M5000). Raw compute: 8.397 TFLOPS (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs 4.252 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000). Boost clocks: 2050 MHz vs 1038 MHz.
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 9,493 | 9,406 |
| Architecture | Generation 12.7 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048 | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.397 TFLOPS+97% | 4.252 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2050 MHz+97% | 1038 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 128 | 128 |
| L2 Cache | 12 MB+500% | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | XeSS | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Intel Arc Pro A60 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M5000 has 8 GB. The Quadro M5000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 12 MB (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs 2 MB (Quadro M5000) — the Intel Arc Pro A60 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | System | 211 GB/s |
| Bus Width | System | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 12 MB+500% | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs 12.1 (Quadro M5000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Intel Xe Media Engine (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs NVENC 4.0 (Quadro M5000). Decoder: Intel Xe Media Engine vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro M5000).
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Intel Xe Media Engine | NVENC 4.0 |
| Decoder | Intel Xe Media Engine | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The Intel Arc Pro A60 draws 130W versus the Quadro M5000's 150W — a 14.3% difference. The Intel Arc Pro A60 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs 500W (Quadro M5000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 130W-13% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 73.0+16% | 62.7 |
Value Analysis
The Intel Arc Pro A60 launched at $380 MSRP and currently averages $380, while the Quadro M5000 launched at $999 and now averages $120. The Quadro M5000 costs 68.4% less ($260 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 25.0 (Intel Arc Pro A60) vs 78.4 (Quadro M5000) — the Quadro M5000 offers 213.6% better value. The Intel Arc Pro A60 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2015).
| Feature | Intel Arc Pro A60 | Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $380-62% | $999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $380 | $120-68% |
| Performance per Dollar | 25.0 | 78.4+214% |
| Codename | DG2-256 | GM204 |
| Release | June 6 2023 | June 29 2015 |
| Ranking | #275 | #280 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Intel Arc Pro A60 and Quadro M5000
