Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon R9 M485X

Place in the ranking	466	269
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.62	23.83
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Amethyst	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	15 May 2016 (8 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 cores	2048	1024
Core clock speed	723 MHz	1575 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	92.54	114.2
Floating-point processing power	2.961 TFLOPS	3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	128	64

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	medium sized
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	128.0 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.3	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	-	7.5

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.

R9 M485X 9.52

T2000 Mobile 20.77
+118%

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 M485X 3660

T2000 Mobile 7985
+118%

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

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −106%	35−40 +106%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −116%	40−45 +116%
Elden Ring	27−30 −144%	65−70 +144%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −113%	65−70 +113%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −106%	35−40 +106%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −116%	40−45 +116%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −132%	85−90 +132%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −115%	55−60 +115%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
Valorant	35−40 −140%	80−85 +140%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −113%	65−70 +113%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −106%	35−40 +106%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −116%	40−45 +116%
Dota 2	30−35 −115%	70−75 +115%
Elden Ring	27−30 −144%	65−70 +144%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −74.4%	65−70 +74.4%
Fortnite	55−60 −94.6%	100−110 +94.6%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −132%	85−90 +132%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −115%	70−75 +115%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −115%	55−60 +115%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −86.5%	130−140 +86.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −128%	65−70 +128%
Valorant	35−40 −140%	80−85 +140%
World of Tanks	130−140 −69.8%	230−240 +69.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −113%	65−70 +113%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −106%	35−40 +106%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −116%	40−45 +116%
Dota 2	30−35 −115%	70−75 +115%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −74.4%	65−70 +74.4%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −132%	85−90 +132%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −86.5%	130−140 +86.5%
Valorant	35−40 −140%	80−85 +140%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	12−14 −175%	30−35 +175%
Elden Ring	12−14 −169%	35−40 +169%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 −183%	30−35 +183%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −274%	170−180 +274%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −138%	18−20 +138%
World of Tanks	65−70 −106%	140−150 +106%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −133%	40−45 +133%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −70%	16−18 +70%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −143%	16−18 +143%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −185%	55−60 +185%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −170%	50−55 +170%
Metro Exodus	18−20 −161%	45−50 +161%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −164%	27−30 +164%
Valorant	24−27 −125%	50−55 +125%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −325%	16−18 +325%
Dota 2	20−22 −75%	35−40 +75%
Elden Ring	6−7 −150%	14−16 +150%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 −75%	35−40 +75%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −200%	14−16 +200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −121%	60−65 +121%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −117%	12−14 +117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −75%	35−40 +75%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −163%	21−24 +163%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −325%	16−18 +325%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Dota 2	20−22 −75%	35−40 +75%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −145%	27−30 +145%
Fortnite	10−11 −150%	24−27 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −158%	30−35 +158%
Valorant	9−10 −178%	24−27 +178%

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 325% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, T2000 Mobile surpassed R9 M485X in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.52	20.77
Recency	15 May 2016	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	60 Watt

R9 M485X has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 118.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 316.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M485X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M485X is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T2000 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.