RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Quadro K2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000 with RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K2000
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 51 Watt
4.11

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms K2000 by a whopping 864% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking692111
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.41no data
Power efficiency5.5223.61
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGK107no data
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 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 cores3843072
Core clock speed954 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt115 Watt (35 - 115 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate30.53no data
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length202 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.0-

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 K2000 4.11
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 39.62
+864%

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 K2000 1582
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 15264
+865%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.11 39.62
Recency 1 March 2013 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 115 Watt

Quadro K2000 has 125.5% lower power consumption.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 864% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000 is a workstation card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation 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 Quadro K2000
Quadro K2000
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 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.


3.6 215 votes

Rate Quadro K2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 19 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation 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.