Quadro M2000 vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	152	440
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	3.59
Power efficiency	21.68	9.60
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	TU104	GM206
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	8 April 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$437.75

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	2560	768
Core clock speed	1110 MHz	796 MHz
Boost clock speed	1560 MHz	1163 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	2,940 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	249.6	55.82
Floating-point processing power	7.987 TFLOPS	1.786 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	160	48
Tensor Cores	320	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	40	no data

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 size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	201 mm
Width	no data	1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR6	128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	1653 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	Up to 106 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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	No outputs	4x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displays	no data	4
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro	no data	+
Mosaic	no data	+
VR Ready	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.5	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	7.5	5.2

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 HD	110 +267%	30−35 −267%
1440p	65 +261%	18−20 −261%
4K	48 +243%	14−16 −243%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	14.59
1440p	no data	24.32
4K	no data	31.27

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

55−60
+244%

16−18

−244%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	87 +263%	24−27 −263%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +250%	16−18 −250%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +250%	30−33 −250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +267%	18−20 −267%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +244%	16−18 −244%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +243%	21−24 −243%
Far Cry New Dawn	125 +257%	35−40 −257%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +244%	50−55 −244%
Hitman 3	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +253%	40−45 −253%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +260%	30−33 −260%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +233%	24−27 −233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	180 +260%	50−55 −260%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +237%	35−40 −237%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65−70 +283%	18−20 −283%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +250%	16−18 −250%
Battlefield 5	100−110 +250%	30−33 −250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +267%	18−20 −267%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +244%	16−18 −244%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +243%	21−24 −243%
Far Cry New Dawn	90 +233%	27−30 −233%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +244%	50−55 −244%
Hitman 3	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +253%	40−45 −253%
Metro Exodus	100−110 +260%	30−33 −260%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80−85 +233%	24−27 −233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +280%	30−33 −280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +237%	35−40 −237%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	54 +238%	16−18 −238%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55−60 +250%	16−18 −250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	65−70 +267%	18−20 −267%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +244%	16−18 −244%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +243%	21−24 −243%
Forza Horizon 4	170−180 +244%	50−55 −244%
Hitman 3	65−70 +278%	18−20 −278%
Horizon Zero Dawn	121 +246%	35−40 −246%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110−120 +280%	30−33 −280%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75 +257%	21−24 −257%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 +237%	35−40 −237%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

80−85
+233%

24−27

−233%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +239%	18−20 −239%
Far Cry New Dawn	60 +233%	18−20 −233%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	41 +242%	12−14 −242%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 +240%	10−11 −240%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 +280%	10−11 −280%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +270%	10−11 −270%
Forza Horizon 4	180−190 +238%	55−60 −238%
Hitman 3	40−45 +233%	12−14 −233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	89 +271%	24−27 −271%
Metro Exodus	77 +267%	21−24 −267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +257%	21−24 −257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +267%	12−14 −267%
Watch Dogs: Legion	170−180 +240%	50−55 −240%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+244%

16−18

−244%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +256%	9−10 −256%
Far Cry New Dawn	33 +267%	9−10 −267%
Hitman 3	24−27 +271%	7−8 −271%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +253%	45−50 −253%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +290%	10−11 −290%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 +264%	14−16 −264%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	28 +250%	8−9 −250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +280%	5−6 −280%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +233%	6−7 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +260%	5−6 −260%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +267%	12−14 −267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +250%	12−14 −250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30

+250%

8−9
−250%

This is how RTX 4000 Mobile and Quadro M2000 compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 Mobile is 267% faster in 1080p
RTX 4000 Mobile is 261% faster in 1440p
RTX 4000 Mobile is 243% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	34.20	10.33
Recency	27 May 2019	8 April 2016
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	75 Watt

RTX 4000 Mobile has a 231.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro M2000, on the other hand, has 46.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Quadro M2000 is a workstation one.

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