
Quadro M5000M vs Tesla M60

Quadro M5000M
Popular choices:

Tesla M60
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 M5000M is positioned at rank 13 and the Tesla M60 is on rank 277, so the Quadro M5000M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M5000M
Performance Per Dollar Tesla M60
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro M5000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tesla M60.
| Insight | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro M5000M 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 Tesla M60

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.

Tesla M60
The Tesla M60 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,002 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro M5000M scores 7,056 and the Tesla M60 reaches 7,002 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro M5000M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Tesla M60 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 2,048 (Tesla M60). Raw compute: 2.995 TFLOPS (Quadro M5000M) vs 4.825 TFLOPS ×2 (Tesla M60). Boost clocks: 1051 MHz vs 1178 MHz.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,056 | 7,002 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1,536 | 2048 ×2+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.995 TFLOPS | 4.825 TFLOPS ×2+61% |
| Boost Clock | 1051 MHz | 1178 MHz+12% |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 ×2 |
| TMUs | 96 | 128 ×2+33% |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 768 KB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 M5000M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Tesla M60 has 4 GB. The Quadro M5000M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Quadro M5000M) vs 12.1 (Tesla M60). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+27% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (Quadro M5000M) vs NVENC 2.0 (2x) (Tesla M60). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs PureVideo HD VP6 (2x). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Quadro M5000M) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Tesla M60).
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5.0 | NVENC 2.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | PureVideo HD VP6 (2x) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro M5000M draws 100W versus the Tesla M60's 300W — a 100% difference. The Quadro M5000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro M5000M) vs 350W (Tesla M60). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Quadro M5000M | Tesla M60 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-67% | 300W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 267mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 70.6+203% | 23.3 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











