Quadro RTX 8000 vs Quadro K2100M

Place in the ranking	727	61
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.63	1.97
Power efficiency	4.42	13.29
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GK106	TU102
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	23 July 2013 (11 years ago)	13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$84.95	$9,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 8000 has 213% better value for money than K2100M.

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	576	4608
Core clock speed	667 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	2,540 million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	32.02	509.8
Floating-point processing power	0.7684 TFLOPS	16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	48	288
Tensor Cores	no data	576
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	72

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	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	752 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48.0 GB/s	672.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
Display Port	1.2	no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

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.

K2100M 3.53

RTX 8000 50.21
+1322%

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.

K2100M 1356

RTX 8000 19305
+1324%

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.

K2100M 4560

RTX 8000 147323
+3131%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

K2100M 4104

RTX 8000 122427
+2883%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

K2100M 3028

RTX 8000 144049
+4657%

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

−1150%

300−350
+1150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.54

+842%

33.33
−842%

K2100M has 842% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −1264%	150−160 +1264%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Elden Ring	8−9 −1275%	110−120 +1275%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −1264%	150−160 +1264%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −1317%	170−180 +1317%
Valorant	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −1264%	150−160 +1264%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Dota 2	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Elden Ring	8−9 −1275%	110−120 +1275%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −1321%	270−280 +1321%
Fortnite	20−22 −1300%	280−290 +1300%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 −1190%	400−450 +1190%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −1317%	170−180 +1317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −1317%	170−180 +1317%
Valorant	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%
World of Tanks	60−65 −1293%	850−900 +1293%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 −1264%	150−160 +1264%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1257%	95−100 +1257%
Dota 2	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −1321%	270−280 +1321%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 −1190%	400−450 +1190%
Valorant	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Elden Ring	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −1300%	350−400 +1300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
World of Tanks	24−27 −1300%	350−400 +1300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −1233%	120−130 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −1275%	110−120 +1275%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −1300%	70−75 +1300%
Valorant	10−12 −1264%	150−160 +1264%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Elden Ring	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −1300%	140−150 +1300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Dota 2	16−18 −1275%	220−230 +1275%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1275%	55−60 +1275%
Fortnite	2−3 −1250%	27−30 +1250%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Valorant	3−4 −1233%	40−45 +1233%

This is how K2100M and RTX 8000 compete in popular games:

RTX 8000 is 1150% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.53	50.21
Recency	23 July 2013	13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	260 Watt

K2100M has 372.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 8000, on the other hand, has a 1322.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2100M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2100M is a mobile workstation card while Quadro RTX 8000 is a workstation one.

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