Quadro K5200 vs Tesla M6
Quadro K5200
Popular choices:
Tesla M6
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 Quadro K5200 is positioned at rank 254 and the Tesla M6 is on rank 188, so the Tesla M6 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5200
Performance Per Dollar Tesla M6
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tesla M6 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K5200 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro K5200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro K5200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $70 (vs $84), it costs 17% less, resulting in a 18.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+18.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($70) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($84) |
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 Quadro K5200 and Tesla M6
Quadro K5200
The Quadro K5200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 667 MHz to 771 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,149 points. Launch price was $1,699.74.
Tesla M6
The Tesla M6 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 930 MHz to 1180 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,225 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro K5200 scores 6,149 and the Tesla M6 reaches 6,225 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro K5200 is built on Kepler while the Tesla M6 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,304 (Quadro K5200) vs 1,536 (Tesla M6). Raw compute: 3.553 TFLOPS (Quadro K5200) vs 3.625 TFLOPS (Tesla M6). Boost clocks: 771 MHz vs 1180 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,149 | 6,225+1% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+50% | 1536 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.553 TFLOPS | 3.625 TFLOPS+2% |
| Boost Clock | 771 MHz | 1180 MHz+53% |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 192+100% | 96 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro K5200 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla M6 has 4 GB. The Quadro K5200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K5200 draws 150W versus the Tesla M6's 100W — a 40% difference. The Tesla M6 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K5200) vs 350W (Tesla M6). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 100W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 1mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 41.0 | 62.3+52% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro K5200 launched at $2250 MSRP and currently averages $70, while the Tesla M6 launched at $1000 and now averages $84. The Quadro K5200 costs 16.7% less ($14 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 87.8 (Quadro K5200) vs 74.1 (Tesla M6) — the Quadro K5200 offers 18.5% better value. The Tesla M6 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Quadro K5200 | Tesla M6 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2250 | $1000-56% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $70-17% | $84 |
| Performance per Dollar | 87.8+18% | 74.1 |
| Codename | GK110B | GM204 |
| Release | July 22 2014 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #391 | #388 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K5200 and Tesla M6
