Radeon R9 370 1024SP vs Quadro P2000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking290not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.80no data
Power efficiency17.93no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGP106Trinidad
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date6 February 2017 (7 years ago)12 June 2015 (9 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 cores10241024
Core clock speed1076 MHz925 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHz975 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate94.7262.40
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS1.997 TFLOPS
ROPs4032
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 3.0 x16
Length201 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth140.2 GB/s179.2 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 DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA6.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 February 2017 12 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 150 Watt

Quadro P2000 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 150% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro P2000 and Radeon R9 370 1024SP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 370 1024SP 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
AMD Radeon R9 370 1024SP
Radeon R9 370 1024SP

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.


3.5 624 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.1 297 votes

Rate Radeon R9 370 1024SP 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.