RTX A2000 12 GB vs Quadro FX 2500M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2500M with RTX A2000 12 GB, including specs and performance data.

FX 2500M
2005
512 MB GDDR3, 45 Watt
0.56

RTX A2000 12 GB outperforms FX 2500M by a whopping 6246% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1211141
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data88.43
Power efficiency0.8735.41
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG71GA106
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date29 September 2005 (19 years ago)23 November 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.99 $449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 2500M and RTX A2000 12 GB have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores323328
Core clock speed500 MHz562 MHz
Boost clock speed500 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors278 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate12.00124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs24104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Coresno data26

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
InterfaceMXM-IIIPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data167 mm
Widthno data2-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB12 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s288.0 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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6

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.

FX 2500M 0.56
RTX A2000 12 GB 35.54
+6246%

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.

FX 2500M 217
RTX A2000 12 GB 13708
+6217%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−6150%
250−260
+6150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−5900%
300−310
+5900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−5809%
650−700
+5809%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−5733%
350−400
+5733%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−6233%
1900−1950
+6233%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−6150%
250−260
+6150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−5900%
300−310
+5900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−5809%
650−700
+5809%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−5733%
350−400
+5733%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−5900%
600−650
+5900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−6233%
1900−1950
+6233%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−6150%
250−260
+6150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Hitman 3 5−6
−5900%
300−310
+5900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−5809%
650−700
+5809%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−5733%
350−400
+5733%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−5900%
600−650
+5900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−6233%
1900−1950
+6233%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−5733%
350−400
+5733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−6233%
190−200
+6233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−5900%
60−65
+5900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−5900%
120−130
+5900%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.56 35.54
Recency 29 September 2005 23 November 2021
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 12 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 70 Watt

FX 2500M has 55.6% lower power consumption.

RTX A2000 12 GB, on the other hand, has a 6246.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A2000 12 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2500M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2500M is a mobile workstation card while RTX A2000 12 GB 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 Quadro FX 2500M
Quadro FX 2500M
NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB
RTX A2000 12 GB

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 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 138 votes

Rate RTX A2000 12 GB 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.