Quadro K2000 vs Arc 8-Core iGPU

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc 8-Core iGPU with Quadro K2000, including specs and performance data.

Arc 8-Core iGPU
2023
18.69
+356%

Arc 8-Core iGPU outperforms K2000 by a whopping 356% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking293688
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.36
Power efficiencyno data5.56
ArchitectureXe LPG (2023)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameMeteor Lake iGPUGK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores8384
Core clock speedno data954 MHz
Boost clock speed2300 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data51 Watt
Texture fill rateno data30.53
Floating-point processing powerno data0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data202 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data64 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno data1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12_212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-+
CUDA-3.0

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD36
+414%
7−8
−414%
1440p20
+400%
4−5
−400%
4K17
+467%
3−4
−467%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data85.57
1440pno data149.75
4Kno data199.67

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+367%
9−10
−367%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+408%
12−14
−408%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+378%
9−10
−378%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+388%
24−27
−388%
Hitman 3 35−40
+414%
7−8
−414%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+406%
18−20
−406%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+357%
14−16
−357%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+408%
12−14
−408%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+389%
18−20
−389%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+367%
9−10
−367%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+408%
12−14
−408%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+378%
9−10
−378%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+388%
24−27
−388%
Hitman 3 35−40
+414%
7−8
−414%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+406%
18−20
−406%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+357%
14−16
−357%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 58
+383%
12−14
−383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+367%
9−10
−367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+389%
18−20
−389%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+367%
9−10
−367%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+378%
9−10
−378%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+388%
24−27
−388%
Hitman 3 35−40
+414%
7−8
−414%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
+413%
8−9
−413%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 46
+360%
10−11
−360%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+380%
5−6
−380%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+389%
18−20
−389%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+414%
7−8
−414%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+367%
6−7
−367%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+386%
21−24
−386%
Hitman 3 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+375%
8−9
−375%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+386%
7−8
−386%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 34
+386%
7−8
−386%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+363%
24−27
−363%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+417%
6−7
−417%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+357%
21−24
−357%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+400%
5−6
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
+367%
3−4
−367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%

This is how Arc 8-Core iGPU and Quadro K2000 compete in popular games:

  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is 414% faster in 1080p
  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is 400% faster in 1440p
  • Arc 8-Core iGPU is 467% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.69 4.10
Recency 14 December 2023 1 March 2013
Chip lithography 5 nm 28 nm

Arc 8-Core iGPU has a 355.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc 8-Core iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc 8-Core iGPU is a notebook card while Quadro K2000 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Arc 8-Core iGPU
Arc 8-Core iGPU
NVIDIA Quadro K2000
Quadro K2000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 9 votes

Rate Arc 8-Core iGPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 212 votes

Rate Quadro K2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.