Quadro 2000 vs GeForce GTX 480M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 480M SLI with Quadro 2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 480M SLI
2010
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
6.47
+164%

GTX 480M SLI outperforms 2000 by a whopping 164% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking572835
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.12
Power efficiency4.512.75
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameN11E-GTX-A3GF106
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date25 May 2010 (14 years ago)24 December 2010 (13 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 cores704192
Core clock speed425 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors6000 Million1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt62 Watt
Texture fill rateno data20.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.48 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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data178 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 amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1200 MHz650 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data41.6 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.

DirectX1112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-2.1

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:

900p61
+190%
21−24
−190%
Full HD67
+179%
24−27
−179%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data24.96

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Hitman 3 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+183%
18−20
−183%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Hitman 3 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+183%
18−20
−183%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Hitman 3 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+179%
14−16
−179%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+183%
18−20
−183%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Hitman 3 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+193%
14−16
−193%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%

This is how GTX 480M SLI and Quadro 2000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 480M SLI is 190% faster in 900p
  • GTX 480M SLI is 179% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.47 2.45
Recency 25 May 2010 24 December 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 62 Watt

GTX 480M SLI has a 164.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro 2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, and 61.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 480M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 480M SLI is a notebook card while Quadro 2000 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 480M SLI
GeForce GTX 480M SLI
NVIDIA Quadro 2000
Quadro 2000

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce GTX 480M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 311 votes

Rate Quadro 2000 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.