Quadro T1000 vs GeForce MX230

Place in the ranking	646	327
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	32.77	23.14
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GP108	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	21 February 2019 (5 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 cores	256	no data
Core clock speed	1519 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	1455 MHz
Number of transistors	1,800 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.31	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.81 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	16	no data

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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 type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.06 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	no data

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 Connectors

No 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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12.0 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
CUDA	+	-

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 MX230 4.76

Quadro T1000 16.81
+253%

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 MX230 1831

Quadro T1000 6463
+253%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GeForce MX230 6679

Quadro T1000 33829
+406%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

GeForce MX230 7113

Quadro T1000 29927
+321%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

GeForce MX230 6604

Quadro T1000 34236
+418%

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 HD

−233%

70−75
+233%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −233%	40−45 +233%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Elden Ring	10−12 −218%	35−40 +218%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	13 −246%	45−50 +246%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −233%	40−45 +233%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −250%	70−75 +250%
Metro Exodus	15 −233%	50−55 +233%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −233%	50−55 +233%
Valorant	10−12 −218%	35−40 +218%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14 −221%	45−50 +221%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −233%	40−45 +233%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Dota 2	32 −244%	110−120 +244%
Elden Ring	10−12 −218%	35−40 +218%
Far Cry 5	33 −233%	110−120 +233%
Fortnite	27−30 −239%	95−100 +239%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −250%	70−75 +250%
Grand Theft Auto V	19 −242%	65−70 +242%
Metro Exodus	9 −233%	30−33 +233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75 −247%	260−270 +247%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −233%	50−55 +233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −244%	55−60 +244%
Valorant	10−12 −218%	35−40 +218%
World of Tanks	65 −238%	220−230 +238%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10 −250%	35−40 +250%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −233%	40−45 +233%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Dota 2	43 −249%	150−160 +249%
Far Cry 5	18 −233%	60−65 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −250%	70−75 +250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −241%	140−150 +241%
Valorant	10−12 −218%	35−40 +218%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Elden Ring	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 −250%	14−16 +250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 −244%	110−120 +244%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
World of Tanks	30−35 −253%	120−130 +253%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −243%	24−27 +243%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −233%	30−33 +233%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −250%	14−16 +250%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −250%	35−40 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −250%	21−24 +250%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −250%	21−24 +250%
Valorant	12−14 −246%	45−50 +246%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −253%	60−65 +253%
Elden Ring	2−3 −250%	7−8 +250%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −244%	55−60 +244%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −221%	45−50 +221%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −244%	55−60 +244%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −250%	14−16 +250%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −250%	7−8 +250%
Dota 2	16−18 −253%	60−65 +253%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −220%	16−18 +220%
Fortnite	4−5 −250%	14−16 +250%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −233%	10−11 +233%
Valorant	4−5 −250%	14−16 +250%

This is how GeForce MX230 and Quadro T1000 compete in popular games:

Quadro T1000 is 233% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.76	16.81
Recency	21 February 2019	27 May 2019
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	50 Watt

GeForce MX230 has 400% lower power consumption.

Quadro T1000, on the other hand, has a 253.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 months, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX230 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX230 is a notebook card while Quadro T1000 is a workstation one.

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