NVIDIA
NVIDIA Quadro P5000 vs GeForce 8300 GS
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
8300 GS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro P5000 and 8300 GS across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Quadro P5000 outperforms 8300 GS by ~13% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+13%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 16Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (~13%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Quadro P5000
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: CUDA / OpenCL · No dedicated hardware upscaling (DLSS unsupported)
Reasons to consider 8300 GS
- Lower stated power consumption
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
5836
100100
58100
884
Graphics card ranking
Positions 24–29of 30
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce 8300 GS
132 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
58Better
36
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
48Better
32
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
46Better
30
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
62Better
55
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
Interface
Memory busBetter
Memory type
Architecture
Device class
Process nodeBetter
Release date
VRAMBetter
Power consumptionBetter
HDMI
Vulkan
Compute API
TFLOPSBetter
DirectX
OpenGL
Upscaling
Transistor countBetter
Die sizeBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
Length
Thickness
Recommended PSUBetter
Power connector
USB Type-C
Max monitors
Max resolution
Power consumption—
Clock speed—
Launch price—
Memory frequency—
Memory bandwidth—
Memory cache—
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Quadro P5000 and 8300 GS across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
Quadro P50008300 GS
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
—
171 FPS
1080p Ultra
—
120 FPS
1440p Ultra
—
74 FPS
4K Ultra
—
28 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Quadro P5000—8300 GS171 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS120 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS74 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS28 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Quadro P5000—8300 GS111 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS95 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS54 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS19 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Quadro P5000—8300 GS139 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS90 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS67 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS41 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyQuadro P5000—8300 GS90 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS76 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS48 FPSQuadro P5000—8300 GS19 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100583647%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100622876%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100662784%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100884183%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 1007221110%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 1007023101%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100662784%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 1007518123%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100672688%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12 (feature level 12_1)10.0
VulkanVulkan 1.3Not supported
OpenGL4.63.3
UpscalingNo dedicated hardware upscaling (DLSS unsupported)Not supported
Compute APICUDA / OpenCLOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1
Architecture and release
ArchitecturePascalTesla
Process node16 nmBetter80 nm
Release date20162007
Device classProfDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count7.2 billionBetter210 million
Die size314 mm²127 mm²Better
Shader units / cores2560 CUDA coresBetter8
Base clock1607 MHzBetter459 MHz
Boost clock1733 MHzBetter459 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2x16
Length267 mmVaries by board
ThicknessDual-slot (38 mm)Single-slot
Recommended PSU450 W200 WBetter
Power connector1× 8-pin PCIeNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMI0 native (DisplayPort adapter supported)Board dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4Board dependent
USB Type-CNot supportedNo
Max monitors4 simultaneous displays3
Max resolution7680×4320 at 30 Hz via DisplayPort 1.42560 × 1600
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM16 GB128 MB DDR2Better
Memory typeGDDR5XDDR2
Memory bus256-bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS8.9Better0.015
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 16
- Specifications
- 0 / 64
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: Quadro P5000 or 8300 GS?+
Quadro P5000 has the higher overall gaming score, while 8300 GS offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
Quadro P5000 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
Quadro P5000 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Quadro P5000 offers more overall performance, while Quadro P5000 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
Quadro P5000 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
8300 GS is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Quadro P5000 leads in combined 1440p performance. Quadro P5000 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Quadro P5000 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
8300 GS is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
8300 GS is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to Quadro P5000 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.