Quadro M2000 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS with Quadro M2000, including specs and performance data.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
30 Watt
11.08
+7.1%

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS outperforms M2000 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking422438
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.46
Power efficiency25.539.54
Architectureno dataMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameno dataGM206
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release dateno data (2024 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 cores1536768
Core clock speedno data796 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz1163 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,940 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data55.82
Floating-point processing powerno data1.786 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data48

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data201 mm
Widthno data1" (2.5 cm)
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 typeLPDDR5x128 Bit
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speed8448 MHz1653 MHz
Memory bandwidthno dataUp 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 Connectorsno data4x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-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 HD36
+20%
30−35
−20%
1440p19
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data14.59
1440pno data27.36

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.08 10.35
Chip lithography 4 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 75 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 7.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and Quadro M2000.

Be aware that Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is a notebook 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.

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.


Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
NVIDIA Quadro M2000
Quadro M2000

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 200 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 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.