Tesla M6 vs Quadro K5200
Tesla M6
Popular choices:
Quadro K5200
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 Tesla M6 is positioned at rank 188 and the Quadro K5200 is on rank 254, 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 Tesla M6
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5200
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 | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| 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 | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+18.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($84) | ✅More affordable ($70) |
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 Tesla M6 and Quadro K5200
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Tesla M6 scores 6,225 and the Quadro K5200 reaches 6,149 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla M6 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro K5200 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (Tesla M6) vs 2,304 (Quadro K5200). Raw compute: 3.625 TFLOPS (Tesla M6) vs 3.553 TFLOPS (Quadro K5200). Boost clocks: 1180 MHz vs 771 MHz.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,225+1% | 6,149 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 2304+50% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.625 TFLOPS+2% | 3.553 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1180 MHz+53% | 771 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 96 | 192+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Tesla M6 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro K5200 has 8 GB. The Quadro K5200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla M6 draws 100W versus the Quadro K5200's 150W — a 40% difference. The Tesla M6 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla M6) vs 350W (Quadro K5200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W-33% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 62.3+52% | 41.0 |
Value Analysis
The Tesla M6 launched at $1000 MSRP and currently averages $84, while the Quadro K5200 launched at $2250 and now averages $70. The Quadro K5200 costs 16.7% less ($14 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 74.1 (Tesla M6) vs 87.8 (Quadro K5200) — the Quadro K5200 offers 18.5% better value. The Tesla M6 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Tesla M6 | Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1000-56% | $2250 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $84 | $70-17% |
| Performance per Dollar | 74.1 | 87.8+18% |
| Codename | GM204 | GK110B |
| Release | August 30 2015 | July 22 2014 |
| Ranking | #388 | #391 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla M6 and Quadro K5200
