RTX A4500 Mobile vs Quadro T2000 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro T2000 Mobile with RTX A4500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX A4500 Mobile outperforms T2000 Mobile by a whopping 120% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 263 | 75 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Ampere (2020−2024) |
GPU code name | N19P-Q3 | GA104 |
Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Release date | 27 May 2019 (5 years ago) | 30 March 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1024 | 5888 |
Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 930 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1500 MHz |
Number of transistors | 4,700 million | 17,400 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 8 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 140 Watt (80 - 140 Watt TGP) |
Texture fill rate | 114.2 | 223.6 |
Floating-point performance | 3.656 gflops | 14.31 gflops |
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 | medium sized | large |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 16 GB |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 16000 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 448.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.6 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
CUDA | 7.5 | 8.6 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1550%
|
2−3
−1550%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 45−50
+1433%
|
3−4
−1433%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 35−40
−114%
|
75−80
+114%
|
Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−106%
|
140−150
+106%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1550%
|
2−3
−1550%
|
Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−108%
|
100−105
+108%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 55−60
−118%
|
120−130
+118%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
−113%
|
270−280
+113%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
+925%
|
4−5
−925%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 95−100
+1138%
|
8−9
−1138%
|
Metro Exodus | 70−75
−111%
|
150−160
+111%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
−118%
|
120−130
+118%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 90−95
+232%
|
27−30
−232%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 45−50
+1433%
|
3−4
−1433%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 35−40
−114%
|
75−80
+114%
|
Battlefield 5 | 65−70
−106%
|
140−150
+106%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1550%
|
2−3
−1550%
|
Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−108%
|
100−105
+108%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 55−60
−118%
|
120−130
+118%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
−113%
|
270−280
+113%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
+925%
|
4−5
−925%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 95−100
+1138%
|
8−9
−1138%
|
Metro Exodus | 70−75
−111%
|
150−160
+111%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
−118%
|
120−130
+118%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+411%
|
9−10
−411%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 90−95
+232%
|
27−30
−232%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 45−50
+1433%
|
3−4
−1433%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 35−40
−114%
|
75−80
+114%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+1550%
|
2−3
−1550%
|
Far Cry 5 | 45−50
−108%
|
100−105
+108%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
−113%
|
270−280
+113%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
+925%
|
4−5
−925%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 95−100
+1138%
|
8−9
−1138%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+411%
|
9−10
−411%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 90−95
+232%
|
27−30
−232%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55−60
−118%
|
120−130
+118%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−113%
|
85−90
+113%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 30−35
−119%
|
70−75
+119%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 21−24
−114%
|
45−50
+114%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 18−20
−111%
|
40−45
+111%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
−117%
|
50−55
+117%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−108%
|
50−55
+108%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
−116%
|
250−260
+116%
|
Hitman 3 | 24−27
+300%
|
6−7
−300%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
Metro Exodus | 35−40
−118%
|
85−90
+118%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40−45
−109%
|
90−95
+109%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
−108%
|
50−55
+108%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 120−130
−115%
|
260−270
+115%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
4K
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 20−22
−100%
|
40−45
+100%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
Hitman 3 | 16−18
−119%
|
35−40
+119%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 100−110
−115%
|
230−240
+115%
|
Metro Exodus | 21−24
−105%
|
45−50
+105%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−114%
|
45−50
+114%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10−12 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−100%
|
8−9
+100%
|
Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
−114%
|
60−65
+114%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 24−27
−108%
|
50−55
+108%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 9−10
−100%
|
18−20
+100%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 2000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, T2000 Mobile surpassed RTX A4500 Mobile in all 29 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 20.69 | 45.47 |
Recency | 27 May 2019 | 30 March 2022 |
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 16 GB |
Chip lithography | 12 nm | 8 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 140 Watt |
T2000 Mobile has 133.3% lower power consumption.
RTX A4500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 119.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX A4500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while RTX A4500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.