Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Nvidia Quadro 5000: Overview

Workstation Shootout: Nvidia Quadro 5000 Vs. ATI FirePro V8800
By

Nvidia is shortening the branding of its workstation cards. While the previous generations were dubbed Quadro FX, the new models will simply be called Quadro, followed by their model number. The FX suffix that many buyers associate with “special effects” has been dropped completely. AMD made a similar move last year, renaming its FireGL line to FirePro. The “GL,” which referenced the OpenGL graphics language, has been switched out for Pro, connoting “professional” instead.

The Quadro 5000, built by Nvidia and distributed by PNY, is considered the secret flagship of the Quadro family. Sure, there’s also the Quadro 6000, which is equivalent to the desktop GeForce GTX 480, just with an overabundance of memory. Of course, this model will surely find buyers as well, but the target audience is much smaller. That’s partly due to a steep price, but also because of there is only a limited number of applications out there that would benefit from such a card. We saw the same thing with the previous-generation Quadro FX 4800 and FX 5800.

So what kind of graphics card is the Quadro 5000, really? Well, under the hood, we find a GF100 GPU with 352 shader cores enabled. That makes it equivalent to the GeForce GTX 465 found in the desktop space, albeit a slightly chubbier and slower one. After all the, Quadro 5000 comes with more than twice as much memory as the GeForce GTX 465, but runs at lower clock speeds. The following table gives you a side-by-side comparison of the two cards.

Specifications
Quadro 5000GeForce GTX 465
ChipGF100 / FermiGF100 / Fermi
Memory2560 MB1024 MB
Core Clock Rate
513 MHz607 MHz
Shader Clock Rate
1026 MHz1215 MHz
Memory Clock Rate
1500 MHz1600 MHz


In all, Nvidia launched a total of five products for the workstation and server markets.

Scalable visualization system:

  • Quadro Plex 7000, 12 GB memory, 896 CUDA cores


Desktop workstation:
 

  • Quadro 6000, 6 GB GDDR5 memory, 448 CUDA cores
  • Quadro 5000, 2.5 GB GDDR5 memory, 352 CUDA cores
  • Quadro 4000, 2 GB GDDR5 memory, 256 CUDA cores


Mobile workstations:

  • Quadro 5000M, 2 GB GDDR5 memory, 320 CUDA cores
Display all 63 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 20 Hide
    joytech22 , September 1, 2010 6:42 AM
    You need to remember, Fermi is designed not "Just" for games, but was also designed, from day one, with computing in mind as well.
  • 17 Hide
    reprotected , September 1, 2010 7:55 AM
    Why isn't the Quadro 6000 and the FX 5800 in the benchmarks?
  • 15 Hide
    Randomacts , September 1, 2010 6:20 AM
    That graphics card cost more then both of the computers I own. O.o
Other Comments
  • 15 Hide
    Randomacts , September 1, 2010 6:20 AM
    That graphics card cost more then both of the computers I own. O.o
  • -9 Hide
    tacoslave , September 1, 2010 6:22 AM
    if amd put a little more work on their drivers (i.e crossfire and firepro performance)they would be the clear performance champion.
  • 15 Hide
    Gin Fushicho , September 1, 2010 6:35 AM
    I really wish I knew what these numbers meant.

    For someone who doesn't do 3-D design these benchmarks are kinda confusing.
  • 0 Hide
    TheStealthyOne , September 1, 2010 6:36 AM
    The cooler for the FirePro card is really attractive imo.
  • 20 Hide
    joytech22 , September 1, 2010 6:42 AM
    You need to remember, Fermi is designed not "Just" for games, but was also designed, from day one, with computing in mind as well.
  • 6 Hide
    darthvidor , September 1, 2010 6:56 AM
    I'm impressed to find nvidia beating amd in power consumption.
  • 17 Hide
    reprotected , September 1, 2010 7:55 AM
    Why isn't the Quadro 6000 and the FX 5800 in the benchmarks?
  • 3 Hide
    SchizoFrog , September 1, 2010 8:08 AM
    Once again the arguement regarding AMD Drivers is brought to the fore. But more than this, when AMD has a line of products that could be said to 'miss' they absolutely FAIL. nVidia on the otherhand seem to have learned their lesson well from the 5xxxFX series and can still produce products that can compete at least at some level, ie: GTX460. Although these are Workstation products, nVidia have a complete package with GPUs and Drivers that work from the off.
  • -2 Hide
    scrumworks , September 1, 2010 8:10 AM
    I'm sure you'll be hearing from AMD pretty soon publishing those kind of results.
  • 7 Hide
    davefb , September 1, 2010 8:21 AM
    sort of interesting, but why is there no comparison to mainstream boards? There is a massive premium of cost here but nothing to be able to say 'hey boss, the onboard graphics we use really don't cut it any more, how about a quadro'.
    (or have I sped-read past the reason why ;)  )
  • 6 Hide
    L0tus , September 1, 2010 8:34 AM
    "AMD's best approach would be to commit more resources to its driver team to rectify the situation."

    Hence why I'm selling my HD5770 and getting a GTX460. Much as I like their hardware, ATI sucks balls on drivers...this card won't even shine on M&B and BF2 is a nightmare.
  • -7 Hide
    ohim , September 1, 2010 9:30 AM
    L0tus"AMD's best approach would be to commit more resources to its driver team to rectify the situation."Hence why I'm selling my HD5770 and getting a GTX460. Much as I like their hardware, ATI sucks balls on drivers...this card won't even shine on M&B and BF2 is a nightmare.

    Why do you even want to compare 2 different cards that have different price range ? At least in my country GTX460 costs almost twice as much as 5770. I wonder why nobody can force Nvidia or AMD to bring the workstation optimization found in Quadro - FirePRO drivers to normal cards ... we all know about the past Quadro mods from normal gaming cards ... most of the time all that differes between the 2 cards is amount of memory.
  • 4 Hide
    joytech22 , September 1, 2010 10:44 AM
    ohimWhy do you even want to compare 2 different cards that have different price range ? At least in my country GTX460 costs almost twice as much as 5770. I wonder why nobody can force Nvidia or AMD to bring the workstation optimization found in Quadro - FirePRO drivers to normal cards ... we all know about the past Quadro mods from normal gaming cards ... most of the time all that differes between the 2 cards is amount of memory.


    Because then Nvidia wouldn't have their Quadro lines would they?

    It's mostly for money, they just change a product a bit and market it as a completely different thing, this rakes in more money, and i know you can turn GTX2** Series card's to Quatro's because iv'e turned my GTX285 into one before.
  • 1 Hide
    soo-nah-mee , September 1, 2010 12:17 PM
    It may be an older card, but I hate the Quardo FX3700 that's in my workstation. I can run Inventor and Solidworks far better at home with an HD4870. ...And if you say your paying for durability or service hours, I don't buy it. You could buy 8 "gaming" cards for the price of my Quadro.
  • 5 Hide
    meat81 , September 1, 2010 12:50 PM
    AMD Drivers fault? Big shocker there
  • -3 Hide
    Poisoner , September 1, 2010 1:18 PM
    Maybe the ati cards just suck. Anyways fermi is designed for compute power is almost apples to oranges. This is no surprise to me knowing that fermi rapes g200 in folding.
  • 1 Hide
    geok1ng , September 1, 2010 1:33 PM
    "AMD's best approach would be to commit more resources to its driver team to rectify the situation."

    A true statement if i ever heard one, since AMD merged ATI and fired lots of ATI personnel.
  • 0 Hide
    pinkfloydminnesota , September 1, 2010 1:38 PM
    more or less a twin? could we have more riddles and less actual description of the components next time?

    what is it, not what is it more or less
  • 0 Hide
    saint19 , September 1, 2010 1:39 PM
    This isn't a secret the Nvidia’s Quadro series is an amazing card against his contenders I just wish that this amazing performance was used in the Fermi series :lol: 
Display more comments