NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 vs AMD Radeon R9 270 1024SP
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 and AMD Radeon R9 270 1024SP videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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 RTX 5000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 80% higher core clock speed: 1620 MHz vs 900 MHz
- Around 96% higher boost clock speed: 1815 MHz vs 925 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.9x more memory clock speed: 14000 MHz vs 4800 MHz
- Around 49% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 105171 vs 70535
- 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 19811 vs 6316
- 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 19811 vs 6316
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 August 2018 vs 13 March 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 1620 MHz vs 900 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1815 MHz vs 925 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 28 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz vs 4800 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 105171 vs 70535 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19811 vs 6316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19811 vs 6316 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270 1024SP
- Around 33% lower typical power consumption: 150 Watt vs 200 Watt
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8390 vs 3719
- 8.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 27566 vs 3358
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8390 vs 3719
- 8.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 27566 vs 3358
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt vs 200 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8390 vs 3719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 27566 vs 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8390 vs 3719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 27566 vs 3358 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270 1024SP
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | AMD Radeon R9 270 1024SP |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 16059 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 749 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 105171 | 70535 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 226.447 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4161.764 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 25.476 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 118.544 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1106.12 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19811 | 6316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 | 8390 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 27566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19811 | 6316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 | 8390 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 27566 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 10685 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | AMD Radeon R9 270 1024SP | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | TU104 | Pitcairn |
| Launch date | 13 August 2018 | 13 March 2015 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,299 | |
| Place in performance rating | 154 | 165 |
| Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1815 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1620 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 200 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Transistor count | 13,600 million | 2,800 million |
| Floating-point performance | 1,894 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 1024 | |
| Texture fill rate | 59.2 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 153.6 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 with others
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
NVIDIATesla V100 PCIe 32 GB
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AMDRadeon RX 5300
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AMDRadeon RX 6600M
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AMDRadeon RX 6600 XT
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AppleM1 Pro 14-core
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AMDRadeon 760M
