
Quadro M5000M
Popular choices:

Radeon 780M
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
Quadro M5000M
2015Why buy it
- ✅57.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌566.7% higher power demand at 100W vs 15W.
Radeon 780M
2024Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 15W instead of 100W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M5000M across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
Quadro M5000M
2015Radeon 780M
2024Why buy it
- ✅57.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 15W instead of 100W, a 85W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌566.7% higher power demand at 100W vs 15W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Quadro M5000M across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
Quick Answers
So, is Quadro M5000M better than Radeon 780M?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon 780M make more sense than Quadro M5000M?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 105 FPS | 93 FPS |
| medium | 89 FPS | 78 FPS |
| high | 73 FPS | 65 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 43 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 89 FPS | 80 FPS |
| medium | 75 FPS | 68 FPS |
| high | 55 FPS | 51 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 29 FPS |
| medium | 32 FPS | 27 FPS |
| high | 20 FPS | 18 FPS |
| ultra | 17 FPS | 16 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 203 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 174 FPS | 67 FPS |
| high | 128 FPS | 47 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 151 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 125 FPS | 45 FPS |
| high | 100 FPS | 33 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 23 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 85 FPS | 35 FPS |
| medium | 71 FPS | 25 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 13 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 318 FPS | 310 FPS |
| medium | 254 FPS | 249 FPS |
| high | 212 FPS | 206 FPS |
| ultra | 159 FPS | 155 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 238 FPS | 227 FPS |
| medium | 191 FPS | 186 FPS |
| high | 159 FPS | 155 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 117 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 137 FPS |
| medium | 127 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 106 FPS | 83 FPS |
| ultra | 79 FPS | 59 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 219 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 186 FPS | 136 FPS |
| high | 152 FPS | 112 FPS |
| ultra | 127 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 172 FPS | 119 FPS |
| medium | 149 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 117 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 96 FPS | 65 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 97 FPS | 71 FPS |
| medium | 76 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 48 FPS | 33 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro M5000M and Radeon 780M

Quadro M5000M
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.

Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M
The Radeon 780M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 31 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 800 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,906 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M5000M scores 7,056 and the Radeon 780M reaches 6,906 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M5000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon 780M uses RDNA 3.0, both on 28 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 768 (Radeon 780M). Raw compute: 2.995 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000M) vs 8.909 TFLOPS (Radeon 780M). Boost clocks: 1051 MHz vs 2900 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,056+2% | 6,906 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | RDNA 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,536+100% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.995 TFLOPS | 8.909 TFLOPS+197% |
| Boost Clock | 1051 MHz | 2900 MHz+176% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+100% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB+125% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M5000M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon 780M has 4 GB. The Quadro M5000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs System.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | Shared |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | System |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 12.2 (Radeon 780M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (Quadro M5000M) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon 780M). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro M5000M) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon 780M).
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5.0 | VCN 4.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | VCN 4.0 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M5000M draws 100W versus the Radeon 780M's 15W — a 147.8% difference. The Radeon 780M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M5000M) vs 350W (Radeon 780M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Radeon 780M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 15W-85% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 70.6 | 460.4+552% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












