Quadro M5000M
VS
GeForce GTX 1060

Quadro M5000M vs GeForce GTX 1060

NVIDIA

Quadro M5000M

2015Core: 975 MHzBoost: 1051 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1060

2016Core: 1607 MHzBoost: 1733 MHz

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. The Quadro M5000M is positioned at rank #13 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent 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 M5000M

#1
Tesla K20m
MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55
209%
#13
Quadro M5000M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#26
RTX A400
MSRP: $135|Avg: $135
63%
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 GeForce GTX 1060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 42.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M5000M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

InsightQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-42.6%)
Leading raw performance (+42.6%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
✅ More VRAM (+33.3%)
❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1060 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 Quadro M5000M and GeForce GTX 1060

NVIDIA

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.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1060

The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Quadro M5000M scores 7,056 versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 10,064 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 42.6%. The Quadro M5000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1060 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060). Raw compute: 2.995 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000M) vs 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060). Boost clocks: 1051 MHz vs 1733 MHz.

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
G3D Mark Score
7,056
10,064+43%
Architecture
Maxwell 2.0
Pascal
Process Node
28 nm
16 nm
Shading Units
1,536
2560+67%
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.995 TFLOPS
8.873 TFLOPS+196%
Boost Clock
1051 MHz
1733 MHz+65%
ROPs
64
64
TMUs
96
160+67%
L1 Cache
576 KB
960 KB+67%
L2 Cache
2 MB
2 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
Upscaling Tech
FSR 1.0 (Software)
FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation
Not Supported
FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
Standard
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Quadro M5000M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1060 has 6 GB. The Quadro M5000M offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 192-bit.

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
VRAM Capacity
8 GB+33%
6 GB
Memory Type
GDDR6
GDDR5
Bus Width
256-bit+33%
192-bit
L2 Cache
2 MB
2 MB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1060). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
DirectX
12.1
12
Vulkan
1.4+8%
1.3
OpenGL
4.6+2%
4.5
Max Displays
4
4
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (Quadro M5000M) vs NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs NVDEC (Pascal). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro M5000M) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060).

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
Encoder
NVENC 5.0
NVENC (Pascal)
Decoder
PureVideo HD VP6
NVDEC (Pascal)
Codecs
MPEG-2,H.264
H.264,H.265/HEVC
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro M5000M draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 180W — a 57.1% difference. The Quadro M5000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M5000M) vs 400W (GeForce GTX 1060). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 173mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
TDP
100W-44%
180W
Recommended PSU
350W-13%
400W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
6-pin
Length
0mm
173mm
Height
0mm
111mm
Slots
0-100%
2
Perf/Watt
70.6+26%
55.9
💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1060 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2015).

FeatureQuadro M5000MGeForce GTX 1060
MSRP
$249
Avg Price (30d)
$60
Codename
GM204
GP104
Release
August 18 2015
May 27 2016
Ranking
#353
#137