Quadro T2000 Max-Q vs Quadro T2000 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro T2000 Mobile and Quadro T2000 Max-Q, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

T2000 Mobile
2019
4 GB GDDR5, 60 Watt
20.72
+15.8%

T2000 Mobile outperforms T2000 Max-Q by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking266307
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency23.6730.68
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU117TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores10241024
Core clock speed1575 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHz1620 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate114.2103.7
Floating-point processing power3.656 TFLOPS3.318 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s128.0 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.57.5

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.

T2000 Mobile 20.72
+15.8%
T2000 Max-Q 17.90

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.

T2000 Mobile 7985
+15.7%
T2000 Max-Q 6899

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.

T2000 Mobile 13524
+18%
T2000 Max-Q 11461

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 HD65−70
+12.1%
58
−12.1%
1440p30−35
+15.4%
26
−15.4%
4K50−55
+8.7%
46
−8.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+17.9%
27−30
−17.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
−15.2%
53
+15.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+17.2%
55−60
−17.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+16.7%
35−40
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+17.9%
27−30
−17.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+14.3%
40−45
−14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+12.4%
110−120
−12.4%
Hitman 3 40−45
+20.6%
30−35
−20.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+12.5%
85−90
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 70−75
−21.1%
86
+21.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
−16.4%
64
+16.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+16.9%
55−60
−16.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+8.1%
85−90
−8.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+15%
40−45
−15%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+17.2%
55−60
−17.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+16.7%
35−40
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+17.9%
27−30
−17.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+14.3%
40−45
−14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+12.4%
110−120
−12.4%
Hitman 3 40−45
+20.6%
30−35
−20.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+12.5%
85−90
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+2.9%
69
−2.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+16.9%
55−60
−16.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+12.2%
40−45
−12.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+8.1%
85−90
−8.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+84%
25
−84%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+16.7%
35−40
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+17.9%
27−30
−17.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+14.3%
40−45
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+12.4%
110−120
−12.4%
Hitman 3 40−45
+20.6%
30−35
−20.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+80%
55
−80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+16.9%
55−60
−16.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+39.4%
33
−39.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+8.1%
85−90
−8.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+17%
47
−17%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+17.6%
30−35
−17.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+26.7%
14−16
−26.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+19.6%
95−100
−19.6%
Hitman 3 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+16.7%
35−40
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+18.2%
30−35
−18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+20%
20−22
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+13.1%
100−110
−13.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Hitman 3 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+16.3%
90−95
−16.3%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+26.3%
18−20
−26.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%

This is how T2000 Mobile and T2000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 12% faster in 1080p
  • T2000 Mobile is 15% faster in 1440p
  • T2000 Mobile is 9% faster in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 84% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the T2000 Max-Q is 21% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 69 tests (96%)
  • T2000 Max-Q is ahead in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.72 17.90
Power consumption (TDP) 60 Watt 40 Watt

T2000 Mobile has a 15.8% higher aggregate performance score.

T2000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Max-Q 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 T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Quadro T2000 Max-Q

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.


3.6 394 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 75 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Max-Q 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.