ATI Radeon E4690 vs Quadro P2000

Place in the ranking	291	1092
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.63	no data
Power efficiency	17.51	2.44
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	GP106	RV730
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	6 February 2017 (7 years ago)	1 June 2009 (15 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	320
Core clock speed	1076 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1480 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,400 million	514 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	94.72	19.20
Floating-point processing power	3.031 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	40	8
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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-II
Length	201 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	MXM Module
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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	160 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1752 MHz	1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	140.2 GB/s	22.4 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 Connectors

4x DisplayPort

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	10.1
Shader Model	6.4	4.1
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.0
Vulkan	+	-
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
+1694%

ATI E4690 1.05

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
+1695%

ATI E4690 405

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 +1733%	3−4 −1733%
1440p	22 +2100%	1−2 −2100%
4K	18 +1700%	1−2 −1700%

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
+2900%

1−2

−2900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +2000%	2−3 −2000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +1967%	3−4 −1967%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +1800%	2−3 −1800%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +2900%	1−2 −2900%
Far Cry 5	42 +2000%	2−3 −2000%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +2450%	2−3 −2450%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1867%	6−7 −1867%
Hitman 3	35−40 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +1740%	5−6 −1740%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +2067%	3−4 −2067%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +2450%	2−3 −2450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	77 +1825%	4−5 −1825%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +2100%	4−5 −2100%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +2000%	2−3 −2000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +1967%	3−4 −1967%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +1800%	2−3 −1800%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +2900%	1−2 −2900%
Far Cry 5	33 +3200%	1−2 −3200%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +2450%	2−3 −2450%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1867%	6−7 −1867%
Hitman 3	35−40 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +1740%	5−6 −1740%
Metro Exodus	65−70 +2067%	3−4 −2067%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +2450%	2−3 −2450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +1967%	3−4 −1967%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +2050%	2−3 −2050%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +2100%	4−5 −2100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +2000%	2−3 −2000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +1800%	2−3 −1800%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 +2900%	1−2 −2900%
Far Cry 5	26 +2500%	1−2 −2500%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1867%	6−7 −1867%
Hitman 3	35−40 +1750%	2−3 −1750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 +1740%	5−6 −1740%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 +1967%	3−4 −1967%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 +2400%	1−2 −2400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +2100%	4−5 −2100%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55
+2450%

2−3

−2450%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +1700%	2−3 −1700%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +2800%	1−2 −2800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12	0−1
Far Cry 5	14	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +1980%	5−6 −1980%
Hitman 3	21−24 +2100%	1−2 −2100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +1800%	2−3 −1800%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +1800%	2−3 −1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +1767%	6−7 −1767%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35
+3000%

1−2

−3000%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16	0−1
Hitman 3	14−16	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 +1840%	5−6 −1840%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +1900%	1−2 −1900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13	0−1

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 +2500%	1−2 −2500%
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

0−1

This is how Quadro P2000 and ATI E4690 compete in popular games:

Quadro P2000 is 1733% faster in 1080p
Quadro P2000 is 2100% faster in 1440p
Quadro P2000 is 1700% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.84	1.05
Recency	6 February 2017	1 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	16 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 1694.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 243.8% more advanced lithography process.

ATI E4690, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon E4690 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon E4690 is a desktop one.

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