Quadro K5100M vs Radeon R7 260X

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.

Quadro K5100M vs Radeon R7 260X FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Quadro K5100M vs Radeon R7 260X: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Quadro K5100M

2013

Why buy it

✅66.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Draws 100W instead of 115W, a 15W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 23.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $139 MSRP).

Radeon R7 260X

2013

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 23.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($139 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro K5100M across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌15% higher power demand at 115W vs 100W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Quadro K5100M is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 66.3% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 2.1% in PassMark G3D (3,264 vs 3,198), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro K5100M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 8 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

Radeon R7 260X makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R7 260X is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Quadro K5100M has the stronger long-term case.

Quadro K5100M vs Radeon R7 260X Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Quadro K5100M

The Quadro K5100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 771 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,264 points.

Radeon R7 260X

The Radeon R7 260X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 115W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,198 points. Launch price was $139.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro K5100M scores 3,264 and the Radeon R7 260X reaches 3,198 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K5100M is built on Kepler while the Radeon R7 260X uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (Quadro K5100M) vs 896 (Radeon R7 260X). Raw compute: 2.369 TFLOPS (Quadro K5100M) vs 1.971 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 260X).

Feature	Quadro K5100M	Radeon R7 260X
G3D Mark Score	3,264+2%	3,198
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1536+71%	896
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.369 TFLOPS+20%	1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	128+129%	56
L1 Cache	128 KB	224 KB+75%
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K5100M	Radeon R7 260X
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro K5100M has 8 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R7 260X carries 2 GB. Quadro K5100M gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the Quadro K5100M and 128-bit on the Radeon R7 260X. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Quadro K5100M) vs 256 KB (Radeon R7 260X) — the Quadro K5100M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K5100M	Radeon R7 260X
VRAM Capacity	8 GB+300%	2 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 K5100M) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R7 260X). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 6.

Feature	Quadro K5100M	Radeon R7 260X
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_0)
Vulkan	1.2	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	6+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: 1st Gen NVENC (Kepler) (Quadro K5100M) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R7 260X). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro K5100M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R7 260X).

Feature	Quadro K5100M	Radeon R7 260X
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

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K5100M draws 100W versus the Radeon R7 260X's 115W — a 14% difference. The Quadro K5100M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K5100M) vs 500W (Radeon R7 260X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80.

Feature	Quadro K5100M	Radeon R7 260X
TDP	100W-13%	115W
Recommended PSU	350W-30%	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	1x 6-pin
Length	—	170mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	85°C	80-6%
Perf/Watt	32.6+17%	27.8