Radeon Pro Duo Polaris vs Quadro P2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking291not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.64no data
Power efficiency17.39no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP106Ellesmere
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date6 February 2017 (7 years ago)24 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$585 $999

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 cores10242304
Core clock speed1076 MHz1243 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,400 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate94.72179.0
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS5.728 TFLOPS
ROPs4032
TMUs64144

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 3.0 x16
Length201 mm305 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount5 GB16 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth140.2 GB/s224.0 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 DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA6.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 February 2017 24 April 2017
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 250 Watt

Quadro P2000 has 233.3% lower power consumption.

Pro Duo Polaris, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months, a 220% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro P2000 and Radeon Pro Duo Polaris. We've got no test results to judge.


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
AMD Radeon Pro Duo Polaris
Radeon Pro Duo Polaris

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.


3.5 627 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 35 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Duo Polaris 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.