NVIDIA Quadro P5200 Max-Q vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P5200 Max-Q and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, API support, Memory, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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 P5200 Max-Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 50% higher core clock speed: 1316 MHz vs 875 MHz
- Around 69% higher boost clock speed: 1569 MHz vs 928 MHz
- 1195.2x more texture fill rate: 251.0 GTexel/s vs 210 billion / sec
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 250 Watt
- 5.3x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 3 GB
- 257.7x more memory clock speed: 1804 MHz (7216 MHz effective) vs 7.0 GB/s
- Around 90% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 53809 vs 28360
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 21 February 2018 vs 7 November 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1316 MHz vs 875 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1569 MHz vs 928 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 251.0 GTexel/s vs 210 billion / sec |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 250 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 3 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 1804 MHz (7216 MHz effective) vs 7.0 GB/s |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 53809 vs 28360 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti
- Around 13% higher pipelines: 2880 vs 2560
| Pipelines | 2880 vs 2560 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P5200 Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro P5200 Max-Q | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 53809 | 28360 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9457 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 632 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.429 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2001.15 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.854 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 58.067 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 182.11 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10021 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3342 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10021 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3342 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3390 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro P5200 Max-Q | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
| Code name | GP104 | GK110B |
| Launch date | 21 February 2018 | 7 November 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 396 | 393 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $699 | |
| Price now | $749.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 14.80 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1569 MHz | 928 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1316 MHz | 875 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 251.0 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 125.5 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 8.033 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 2880 |
| Pixel fill rate | 100.4 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 251.0 GTexel/s | 210 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 7200 million | 7,080 million |
| CUDA cores | 2880 | |
| Floating-point performance | 5,345 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI... |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 230.9 GB/s | 336 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1804 MHz (7216 MHz effective) | 7.0 GB/s |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Length | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
| Supplementary power connectors | One 8-pin and one 6-pin | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision Live | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Blu Ray 3D | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||

