Quadro K2000 vs Radeon R9 370

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 with Quadro K2000, including specs and performance data.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
12.24
+199%

R9 370 outperforms K2000 by a whopping 199% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking397685
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.36
Power efficiency7.955.73
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTrinidadGK107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$599

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 cores1280384
Core clock speed925 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt51 Watt
Texture fill rate78.0030.53
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length221 mm202 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s64 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-3.0

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.

R9 370 12.24
+199%
Quadro K2000 4.09

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.

R9 370 4722
+199%
Quadro K2000 1580

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 HD45
+221%
14−16
−221%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.24 4.09
Recency 5 May 2015 1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 51 Watt

R9 370 has a 199.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro K2000, on the other hand, has 115.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 370 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop card while Quadro K2000 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.


AMD Radeon R9 370
Radeon R9 370
NVIDIA Quadro K2000
Quadro K2000

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.


4.1 396 votes

Rate Radeon R9 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 212 votes

Rate Quadro K2000 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.