Quadro P520 vs Quadro 1000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 1000M and Quadro P520, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro 1000M
2011
2 GB DDR3, 45 Watt
1.47

P520 outperforms 1000M by a whopping 270% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking983607
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency2.2620.92
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGF108GP108
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date13 January 2011 (13 years ago)23 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$174.95 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 cores96384
Core clock speed700 MHz1303 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1493 MHz
Number of transistors585 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate11.2035.83
Floating-point processing power0.2688 TFLOPS1.147 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs1624

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 sizedlarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s48.06 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.16.1

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.

Quadro 1000M 1.47
Quadro P520 5.44
+270%

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.

Quadro 1000M 566
Quadro P520 2097
+270%

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.

Quadro 1000M 943
Quadro P520 4186
+344%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Quadro 1000M 4566
Quadro P520 15720
+244%

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.

Quadro 1000M 2113
Quadro P520 7905
+274%

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 HD43
+126%
19
−126%
4K5−6
−300%
20
+300%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.07no data
4K34.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Hitman 3 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−127%
30−35
+127%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−138%
18−20
+138%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−45.5%
45−50
+45.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Hitman 3 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−127%
30−35
+127%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−138%
18−20
+138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−45.5%
45−50
+45.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−133%
14−16
+133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Hitman 3 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−127%
30−35
+127%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−138%
18−20
+138%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−45.5%
45−50
+45.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 5−6
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Hitman 3 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−386%
30−35
+386%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 2−3
Far Cry 5 0−1 3−4

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Quadro 1000M and Quadro P520 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 1000M is 126% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P520 is 300% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P520 is 775% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P520 is ahead in 48 tests (74%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (26%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.47 5.44
Recency 13 January 2011 23 May 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 18 Watt

Quadro P520 has a 270.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P520 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 1000M in performance tests.


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 Quadro 1000M
Quadro 1000M
NVIDIA Quadro P520
Quadro P520

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.


3.4 122 votes

Rate Quadro 1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 101 vote

Rate Quadro P520 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.