NVIDIA Quadro K1100M vs ATI Radeon HD 5750

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K1100M and ATI Radeon HD 5750 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 1% higher core clock speed: 706 MHz vs 700 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 91% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 86 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• 3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3074 vs 1039
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.649 vs 7.384

Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon HD 5750

• Around 12% higher texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel / s vs 22.59 GTexel / s
• Around 88% higher pipelines: 720 vs 384
• Around 86% better floating-point performance: 1,008.0 gflops vs 542.2 gflops
• Around 64% higher memory clock speed: 4600 MHz vs 2800 MHz
• Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1168 vs 1088
• Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 338 vs 253
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 460.31 vs 174.555
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.679 vs 0.642
• Around 97% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 23.118 vs 11.732
• 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 53.346 vs 16.3
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2124 vs 1892
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1757 vs 861
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3347 vs 1443
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2124 vs 1892
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1757 vs 861
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3347 vs 1443

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5750

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1088 1168
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	253 338
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3074 1039
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.649 7.384
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	174.555 460.31
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.642 0.679
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.732 23.118
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	16.3 53.346
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1892 2124
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	861 1757
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1443 3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1892 2124
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	861 1757
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1443 3347

Compare specifications (specs)