Quadro K2000 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile with Quadro K2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1050 Mobile
2017
4000 MB GDDR5, 75 Watt
11.63
+184%

GTX 1050 Mobile outperforms K2000 by a whopping 184% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking409688
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.36
Power efficiency10.815.60
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGP107BGK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date3 January 2017 (7 years 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 cores640384
Core clock speed1354 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speed1493 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,300 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt51 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature97 °Cno data
Texture fill rate59.7230.53
Floating-point processing power1.911 TFLOPS0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4032

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4000 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7008 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s64 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 ConnectorsDP 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDCP2.2-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream+-
GPU Boost3.0no data
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
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:

900p73
+204%
24−27
−204%
Full HD46
+188%
16−18
−188%
1440p24
+200%
8−9
−200%
4K15
+200%
5−6
−200%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data37.44
1440pno data74.88
4Kno data119.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 37
+208%
12−14
−208%
Battlefield 5 51
+219%
16−18
−219%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40
+186%
14−16
−186%
Far Cry 5 39
+225%
12−14
−225%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
+217%
12−14
−217%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+206%
18−20
−206%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
+200%
9−10
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 33
+230%
10−11
−230%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30
+200%
10−11
−200%
Battlefield 5 44
+214%
14−16
−214%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
Far Cry 5 36
+200%
12−14
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 37
+208%
12−14
−208%
Forza Horizon 4 52
+189%
18−20
−189%
Metro Exodus 19
+217%
6−7
−217%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 29
+190%
10−11
−190%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+225%
12−14
−225%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
+200%
6−7
−200%
Battlefield 5 37
+208%
12−14
−208%
Far Cry 5 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
Far Cry New Dawn 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+208%
12−14
−208%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+214%
7−8
−214%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
+200%
6−7
−200%
Metro Exodus 11
+267%
3−4
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+240%
5−6
−240%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Battlefield 5 26
+189%
9−10
−189%
Far Cry 5 21
+200%
7−8
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
+200%
8−9
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+189%
9−10
−189%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10
+233%
3−4
−233%
Metro Exodus 7
+250%
2−3
−250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8
+300%
2−3
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+250%
2−3
−250%
Battlefield 5 13
+225%
4−5
−225%
Far Cry 5 11
+267%
3−4
−267%
Far Cry New Dawn 11
+267%
3−4
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+200%
5−6
−200%

This is how GTX 1050 Mobile and Quadro K2000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 Mobile is 204% faster in 900p
  • GTX 1050 Mobile is 188% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1050 Mobile is 200% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1050 Mobile is 200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.63 4.10
Recency 3 January 2017 1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4000 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 51 Watt

GTX 1050 Mobile has a 183.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 95.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro K2000, on the other hand, has 47.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
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.


3.7 1221 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 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.