GeForce GTS 250 vs Quadro P2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 with GeForce GTS 250, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P2000
2017
5 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
18.86
+1125%

P2000 outperforms GTS 250 by a whopping 1125% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking295972
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.550.09
Power efficiency17.240.70
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGP106G92B
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date6 February 2017 (7 years ago)4 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$585 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P2000 has 10511% better value for money than GTS 250.

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 cores1024128
Core clock speed1076 MHz738 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,400 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt150 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate94.7244.93
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS0.3871 TFLOPS
ROPs4016
TMUs6464

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length201 mm229 mm
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount5 GB1 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1100 MHz
Memory bandwidth140.2 GB/s70.4 GB/s

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 Connectors4x DisplayPortTwo Dual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.0
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA6.1+

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 18.86
+1125%
GTS 250 1.54

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
+1124%
GTS 250 594

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 HD56
+1300%
4−5
−1300%
1440p22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
4K16
+1500%
1−2
−1500%

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.4549.75
1440p26.59199.00
4K36.56199.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+1140%
5−6
−1140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 42
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1211%
9−10
−1211%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+1214%
7−8
−1214%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+1200%
5−6
−1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 77
+1183%
6−7
−1183%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1157%
7−8
−1157%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+1140%
5−6
−1140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 33
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1211%
9−10
−1211%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+1214%
7−8
−1214%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+1200%
5−6
−1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+1140%
5−6
−1140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1157%
7−8
−1157%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 26
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1211%
9−10
−1211%
Hitman 3 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+1214%
7−8
−1214%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+1140%
5−6
−1140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1157%
7−8
−1157%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1700%
2−3
−1700%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 0−1
Far Cry 5 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+1200%
8−9
−1200%
Hitman 3 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+1144%
9−10
−1144%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Hitman 3 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+1286%
7−8
−1286%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 7 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%

This is how Quadro P2000 and GTS 250 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is 1300% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P2000 is 2100% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 is 1500% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.86 1.54
Recency 6 February 2017 4 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 150 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 1124.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 400% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 243.8% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop 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 P2000
Quadro P2000
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
GeForce GTS 250

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.


3.5 638 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1667 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 250 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.