Quadro 2000 vs Quadro K5000M

Place in the ranking	540	839
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.47	0.15
Power efficiency	5.03	2.73
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	GK104	GF106
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	7 August 2012 (12 years ago)	24 December 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$329.99	$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K5000M has 1547% better value for money than Quadro 2000.

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	1344	192
Core clock speed	601 MHz	625 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	62 Watt
Texture fill rate	67.31	20.00
Floating-point processing power	1.615 TFLOPS	0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	112	32

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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	178 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	750 MHz	650 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	41.6 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

1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	+	2.1

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.

K5000M 7.30
+197%

Quadro 2000 2.46

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.

K5000M 2806
+197%

Quadro 2000 946

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.

K5000M 5107
+31.8%

Quadro 2000 3876

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

K5000M 26
+117%

Quadro 2000 12

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

54
+200%

18−20

−200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

6.11
+445%

33.28

−445%

K5000M has 445% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Elden Ring	20−22 +233%	6−7 −233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +229%	7−8 −229%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +222%	9−10 −222%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +200%	7−8 −200%
Valorant	24−27 +200%	8−9 −200%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +229%	7−8 −229%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Dota 2	24−27 +213%	8−9 −213%
Elden Ring	20−22 +233%	6−7 −233%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +220%	10−11 −220%
Fortnite	40−45 +207%	14−16 −207%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +222%	9−10 −222%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +213%	8−9 −213%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +200%	7−8 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +214%	7−8 −214%
Valorant	24−27 +200%	8−9 −200%
World of Tanks	110−120 +220%	35−40 −220%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +229%	7−8 −229%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Dota 2	24−27 +213%	8−9 −213%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +220%	10−11 −220%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +222%	9−10 −222%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
Valorant	24−27 +200%	8−9 −200%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Elden Ring	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +225%	12−14 −225%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
World of Tanks	50−55 +231%	16−18 −231%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Valorant	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Elden Ring	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +200%	7−8 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Fortnite	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Valorant	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%

This is how K5000M and Quadro 2000 compete in popular games:

K5000M is 200% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.30	2.46
Recency	7 August 2012	24 December 2010
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	62 Watt

K5000M has a 196.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro 2000, on the other hand, has 61.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K5000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K5000M is a mobile workstation card while Quadro 2000 is a workstation one.

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