GeForce GT 750M vs Quadro P2000

Place in the ranking	291	725
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.63	no data
Power efficiency	17.51	4.80
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GP106	GK107
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	6 February 2017 (7 years ago)	9 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$585	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 cores	1024	384
Core clock speed	1076 MHz	941 MHz
Boost clock speed	1480 MHz	967 MHz
Number of transistors	4,400 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	94.72	30.94
Floating-point processing power	3.031 TFLOPS	0.7427 TFLOPS
ROPs	40	16
TMUs	64	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	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	201 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	4 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3/GDDR5
Memory bus width	160 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1752 MHz	1003 MHz
Memory bandwidth	140.2 GB/s	64.19 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	4x DisplayPort	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	-	+
HDCP content protection	-	+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	-	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	-	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	-	+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 API
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	1.1.126
CUDA	6.1	+

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 P2000 18.84
+446%

GT 750M 3.45

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 P2000 7268
+447%

GT 750M 1329

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 P2000 8387
+230%

GT 750M 2543

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 P2000 32964
+243%

GT 750M 9618

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Quadro P2000 6847
+335%

GT 750M 1574

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Quadro P2000 43566
+303%

GT 750M 10822

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 P2000 22934
+439%

GT 750M 4256

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Quadro P2000 23484
+506%

GT 750M 3874

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro P2000 21668
+595%

GT 750M 3118

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	55 +175%	20 −175%
1440p	22 +450%	4−5 −450%
4K	18 +500%	3−4 −500%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	10.64	no data
1440p	26.59	no data
4K	32.50	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

30−33
+400%

6−7

−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +320%	10−11 −320%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +1450%	2−3 −1450%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +786%	7−8 −786%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +375%	8−9 −375%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Far Cry 5	42 +500%	7−8 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +521%	18−20 −521%
Hitman 3	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +268%	24−27 −268%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +1200%	5−6 −1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	77 +450%	14−16 −450%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +115%	40−45 −115%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +320%	10−11 −320%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +1450%	2−3 −1450%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +786%	7−8 −786%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +375%	8−9 −375%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Far Cry 5	33 +371%	7−8 −371%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +521%	18−20 −521%
Hitman 3	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +268%	24−27 −268%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +1200%	5−6 −1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +467%	9−10 −467%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +343%	14−16 −343%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +43.3%	30 −43.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +115%	40−45 −115%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +320%	10−11 −320%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +1450%	2−3 −1450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +375%	8−9 −375%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +400%	6−7 −400%
Far Cry 5	26 +271%	7−8 −271%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +521%	18−20 −521%
Hitman 3	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +268%	24−27 −268%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +343%	14−16 −343%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 +400%	5 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +115%	40−45 −115%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55
+467%

9−10

−467%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +500%	6−7 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +480%	5−6 −480%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Far Cry 5	14 +250%	4−5 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +10300%	1−2 −10300%
Hitman 3	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +375%	8−9 −375%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +533%	6−7 −533%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +433%	21−24 −433%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
+343%

7−8

−343%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Hitman 3	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 +506%	16−18 −506%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +567%	3−4 −567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 +550%	2−3 −550%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	7 +250%	2−3 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +2500%	1−2 −2500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+325%

4−5

−325%

This is how Quadro P2000 and GT 750M compete in popular games:

Quadro P2000 is 175% faster in 1080p
Quadro P2000 is 450% faster in 1440p
Quadro P2000 is 500% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P2000 is 10300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Quadro P2000 surpassed GT 750M in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.84	3.45
Recency	6 February 2017	9 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	50 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 446.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 25% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

GT 750M, on the other hand, has 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 750M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation card while GeForce GT 750M is a notebook one.

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