Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce MX130

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX130 with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX130
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
4.75

T2000 Mobile outperforms MX130 by a whopping 336% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking644266
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.8523.67
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM108TU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date17 November 2017 (7 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores3841024
Core clock speed1122 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1242 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate29.81114.2
Floating-point processing power0.9539 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2464

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/s128.0 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 outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA+7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce MX130 4.75
T2000 Mobile 20.72
+336%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce MX130 1832
T2000 Mobile 7985
+336%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce MX130 2875
T2000 Mobile 13524
+370%

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 HD18
−317%
75−80
+317%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4
−725%
30−35
+725%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−254%
45−50
+254%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−467%
65−70
+467%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−313%
30−35
+313%
Far Cry 5 14
−243%
45−50
+243%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−323%
120−130
+323%
Hitman 3 9
−356%
40−45
+356%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−219%
95−100
+219%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−545%
70−75
+545%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
−165%
65−70
+165%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−102%
90−95
+102%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−254%
45−50
+254%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
Battlefield 5 12−14
−467%
65−70
+467%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−313%
30−35
+313%
Far Cry 5 11
−336%
45−50
+336%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−323%
120−130
+323%
Hitman 3 10−11
−310%
40−45
+310%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−219%
95−100
+219%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−545%
70−75
+545%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
−331%
65−70
+331%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−171%
45−50
+171%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−102%
90−95
+102%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−254%
45−50
+254%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−313%
30−35
+313%
Far Cry 5 8
−500%
45−50
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−323%
120−130
+323%
Hitman 3 10−11
−310%
40−45
+310%
Horizon Zero Dawn 13
−662%
95−100
+662%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
−393%
65−70
+393%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
−557%
45−50
+557%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−102%
90−95
+102%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−357%
30−35
+357%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−425%
21−24
+425%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−475%
21−24
+475%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−1060%
110−120
+1060%
Hitman 3 9−10
−167%
24−27
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−282%
40−45
+282%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−1850%
35−40
+1850%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−303%
120−130
+303%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−278%
30−35
+278%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%
Hitman 3 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−2040%
100−110
+2040%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−2100%
21−24
+2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 4−5
Far Cry 5 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−600%
27−30
+600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how GeForce MX130 and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 317% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 2100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 68 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.75 20.72
Recency 17 November 2017 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 60 Watt

GeForce MX130 has 100% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 336.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX130 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX130 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile 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 MX130
GeForce MX130
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

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 2253 votes

Rate GeForce MX130 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 394 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.