Quadro K5000M vs Radeon R7 260

Quadro K5000M

2012Core: 601 MHz

Radeon R7 260

2013Boost: 1100 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Quadro K5000M

100

2,805

0.0%

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

Radeon R7 260

2,892

+3.1%

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. The Quadro K5000M is positioned at rank #50 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Great cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5000M

#23

Intel Arc Pro B60

MSRP: $500|Avg: $450

98%

#24

Radeon PRO W7600

MSRP: $599|Avg: $599

98%

#25

RTX 2000 Ada Generation

MSRP: $625|Avg: $750

98%

#26

Radeon Pro Vega 48

MSRP: $450|Avg: $450

89%

#27

Radeon Pro 5700 XT

MSRP: $500|Avg: $280

89%

#35

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

527%

#50

Quadro K5000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $509

100%

#51

Radeon PRO W6300

MSRP: $200|Avg: $150

99%

#52

Quadro K4100M

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $261

99%

#58

Quadro K2000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

89%

#60

Intel Arc Pro A60

MSRP: $380|Avg: $380

89%

#63

T400 4GB

MSRP: $159|Avg: $99

85%

#64

Radeon Pro 5300

MSRP: $300|Avg: $150

85%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R7 260 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K5000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+300%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	Normal Efficiency
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon R7 260 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 260 holds the technical lead. Priced at $110 (vs $509), it costs 78% less, resulting in a 377.1% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+377.1%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($509)	✅More affordable ($110)

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.

Quadro K5000M Benchmark Check

Radeon R7 260 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro K5000M and Radeon R7 260

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.

Radeon R7 260

The Radeon R7 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 17 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1100 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,892 points. Launch price was $109.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K5000M scores 2,805 and the Radeon R7 260 reaches 2,892 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K5000M is built on Kepler while the Radeon R7 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,344 (Quadro K5000M) vs 768 (Radeon R7 260). Raw compute: 1.615 TFLOPS (Quadro K5000M) vs 1.536 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260).

Feature	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
G3D Mark Score	2,805	2,892+3%
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1344+75%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.615 TFLOPS+5%	1.536 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	112+133%	48
L1 Cache	112 KB	192 KB+71%
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro K5000M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 260 has 1 GB. The Quadro K5000M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Quadro K5000M) vs 256 KB (Radeon R7 260) — the Quadro K5000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+300%	1 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K5000M) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R7 260). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_0)
Vulkan	1.2	1.2
OpenGL	4.5	4.6+2%
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 1st Gen NVENC (Kepler) (Quadro K5000M) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R7 260). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro K5000M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MVC (Radeon R7 260).

Feature	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
Encoder	1st Gen NVENC (Kepler)	VCE 2.0
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP5	UVD 4.2
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K5000M draws 100W versus the Radeon R7 260's 95W — a 5.1% difference. The Radeon R7 260 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K5000M) vs 400W (Radeon R7 260). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 81°C vs 80.

Feature	Quadro K5000M	Radeon R7 260
TDP	100W	95W-5%
Recommended PSU	350W-13%	400W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	1x 6-pin
Length	—	170mm
Height	—	112mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	81°C	80-1%
Perf/Watt	28.1	30.4+8%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon R7 260 costs 78.4% less ($399 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.5 (Quadro K5000M) vs 26.3 (Radeon R7 260) — the Radeon R7 260 offers 378.2% better value. The Radeon R7 260 is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).