Quadro P3200 Max-Q vs GeForce RTX 2070

Place in the ranking	94	241
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	32.38	no data
Power efficiency	16.51	21.64
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	TU106	GP104
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	17 October 2018 (6 years ago)	21 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$499	no data

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 cores	2304	1792
Core clock speed	1410 MHz	1139 MHz
Boost clock speed	1620 MHz	1404 MHz
Number of transistors	10,800 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	233.3	157.2
Floating-point processing power	7.465 TFLOPS	5.032 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	144	112
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	36	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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	168.3 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	No outputs
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	7.5	6.1

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.

RTX 2070 41.96
+77.9%

P3200 Max-Q 23.58

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.

RTX 2070 16133
+78%

P3200 Max-Q 9066

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	129 +84.3%	70−75 −84.3%
1440p	88 +95.6%	45−50 −95.6%
4K	62 +107%	30−35 −107%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.87	no data
1440p	5.67	no data
4K	8.05	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +78%	50−55 −78%
Cyberpunk 2077	90−95 +82%	50−55 −82%
Elden Ring	140−150 +86.3%	80−85 −86.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90 +80%	50−55 −80%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +78%	50−55 −78%
Cyberpunk 2077	45 +87.5%	24−27 −87.5%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 +88.2%	110−120 −88.2%
Metro Exodus	103 +87.3%	55−60 −87.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	110 +83.3%	60−65 −83.3%
Valorant	208 +89.1%	110−120 −89.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	160 +88.2%	85−90 −88.2%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +78%	50−55 −78%
Cyberpunk 2077	37 +106%	18−20 −106%
Dota 2	130 +85.7%	70−75 −85.7%
Elden Ring	140−150 +86.3%	80−85 −86.3%
Far Cry 5	93 +86%	50−55 −86%
Fortnite	166 +84.4%	90−95 −84.4%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 +88.2%	110−120 −88.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	127 +81.4%	70−75 −81.4%
Metro Exodus	80 +100%	40−45 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	245 +88.5%	130−140 −88.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65 +85.7%	35−40 −85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	150−160 +88.8%	80−85 −88.8%
Valorant	125 +78.6%	70−75 −78.6%
World of Tanks	270−280 +86%	150−160 −86%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	79 +97.5%	40−45 −97.5%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +78%	50−55 −78%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 +100%	16−18 −100%
Dota 2	130 +85.7%	70−75 −85.7%
Far Cry 5	100−105 +81.8%	55−60 −81.8%
Forza Horizon 4	200−210 +88.2%	110−120 −88.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	132 +88.6%	70−75 −88.6%
Valorant	184 +84%	100−105 −84%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	75−80 +97.5%	40−45 −97.5%
Elden Ring	85−90 +95.6%	45−50 −95.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	75−80 +97.5%	40−45 −97.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +84.2%	95−100 −84.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	42 +100%	21−24 −100%
World of Tanks	260−270 +89.3%	140−150 −89.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	76 +90%	40−45 −90%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +79.2%	24−27 −79.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	21 +110%	10−11 −110%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +80%	75−80 −80%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +89.2%	65−70 −89.2%
Metro Exodus	82 +82.2%	45−50 −82.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +87.5%	40−45 −87.5%
Valorant	127 +81.4%	70−75 −81.4%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +83.3%	24−27 −83.3%
Dota 2	86 +91.1%	45−50 −91.1%
Elden Ring	40−45 +100%	21−24 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	86 +91.1%	45−50 −91.1%
Metro Exodus	32 +100%	16−18 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	128 +82.9%	70−75 −82.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27 +92.9%	14−16 −92.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	86 +91.1%	45−50 −91.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	48 +100%	24−27 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +83.3%	24−27 −83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	10 +100%	5−6 −100%
Dota 2	116 +78.5%	65−70 −78.5%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +82.9%	35−40 −82.9%
Fortnite	60−65 +103%	30−33 −103%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +100%	35−40 −100%
Valorant	68 +94.3%	35−40 −94.3%

This is how RTX 2070 and P3200 Max-Q compete in popular games:

RTX 2070 is 84% faster in 1080p
RTX 2070 is 96% faster in 1440p
RTX 2070 is 107% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	41.96	23.58
Recency	17 October 2018	21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	175 Watt	75 Watt

RTX 2070 has a 77.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 months, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 33.3% more advanced lithography process.

P3200 Max-Q, on the other hand, has 133.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 2070 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P3200 Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 2070 is a desktop card while Quadro P3200 Max-Q 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.