Quadro M2000M vs Quadro P3000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P3000 Mobile and Quadro M2000M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

P3000 Mobile
2017
6 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
16.82
+87.7%

P3000 Mobile outperforms M2000M by an impressive 88% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking322487
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency15.3711.17
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGP104GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date11 January 2017 (7 years ago)3 December 2015 (9 years ago)

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 cores1280640
Core clock speed1088 MHz1029 MHz
Boost clock speed1215 MHz1098 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate97.2043.92
Floating-point processing power3.11 TFLOPS1.405 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs8040

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth168 GB/s80 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.41.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus++
3D Vision Prono data+
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic++
nView Display Management++
Optimus++

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA6.15.0

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.

P3000 Mobile 16.82
+87.7%
M2000M 8.96

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.

P3000 Mobile 6482
+87.7%
M2000M 3453

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.

P3000 Mobile 12105
+135%
M2000M 5143

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.

P3000 Mobile 33390
+62.3%
M2000M 20567

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.

P3000 Mobile 9256
+123%
M2000M 4157

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.

P3000 Mobile 63332
+113%
M2000M 29795

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

P3000 Mobile 68
+89.6%
M2000M 36

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

P3000 Mobile 107
+52.8%
M2000M 70

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

P3000 Mobile 73
+121%
M2000M 33

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

P3000 Mobile 97
+111%
M2000M 46

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

P3000 Mobile 87
+119%
M2000M 40

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

P3000 Mobile 30
+103%
M2000M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

P3000 Mobile 55
+150%
M2000M 22

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

P3000 Mobile 8
+141%
M2000M 3

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

P3000 Mobile 55
+150%
M2000M 22

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

P3000 Mobile 68
+89.6%
M2000M 36

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

P3000 Mobile 97
+111%
M2000M 46

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

P3000 Mobile 107
+52.8%
M2000M 70

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

P3000 Mobile 73
+121%
M2000M 33

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

P3000 Mobile 87
+119%
M2000M 40

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

P3000 Mobile 30
+103%
M2000M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

P3000 Mobile 7.7
+141%
M2000M 3.2

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 HD64
+77.8%
36
−77.8%
4K28
+133%
12
−133%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+95.5%
21−24
−95.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+146%
12−14
−146%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+133%
27−30
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+117%
18−20
−117%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+114%
21−24
−114%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+100%
60−65
−100%
Hitman 3 35−40
+124%
16−18
−124%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+88%
50−55
−88%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+139%
27−30
−139%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+50%
60−65
−50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+95.5%
21−24
−95.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+146%
12−14
−146%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+133%
27−30
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+117%
18−20
−117%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+114%
21−24
−114%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+100%
60−65
−100%
Hitman 3 35−40
+124%
16−18
−124%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+88%
50−55
−88%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+139%
27−30
−139%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 81
+12.5%
72
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+50%
60−65
−50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+95.5%
21−24
−95.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+146%
12−14
−146%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+117%
18−20
−117%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+114%
21−24
−114%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+100%
60−65
−100%
Hitman 3 35−40
+124%
16−18
−124%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+88%
50−55
−88%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+136%
14
−136%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+50%
60−65
−50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+108%
24−27
−108%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+118%
16−18
−118%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+107%
14−16
−107%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+182%
35−40
−182%
Hitman 3 21−24
+91.7%
12−14
−91.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+105%
18−20
−105%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+200%
12−14
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+102%
55−60
−102%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+113%
14−16
−113%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+138%
8−9
−138%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Hitman 3 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−105
+178%
35−40
−178%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+144%
9
−144%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+136%
10−12
−136%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

This is how P3000 Mobile and M2000M compete in popular games:

  • P3000 Mobile is 78% faster in 1080p
  • P3000 Mobile is 133% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the P3000 Mobile is 320% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, P3000 Mobile surpassed M2000M in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.82 8.96
Recency 11 January 2017 3 December 2015
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 55 Watt

P3000 Mobile has a 87.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

M2000M, on the other hand, has 36.4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000M in performance tests.


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 P3000 Mobile
Quadro P3000 Mobile
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
Quadro M2000M

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.


3.9 159 votes

Rate Quadro P3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 500 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M 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.