Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon RX 580

Place in the ranking	246	269
Place by popularity	1	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	17.87	no data
Power efficiency	8.56	23.83
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Polaris 20	TU117
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	18 April 2017 (7 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data

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 cores	2304	1024
Core clock speed	1257 MHz	1575 MHz
Boost clock speed	1340 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	5,700 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	185 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	193.0	114.2
Floating-point processing power	6.175 TFLOPS	3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	144	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	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	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	2000 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	256.0 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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	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.

RX 580 23.01
+10.8%

T2000 Mobile 20.77

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.

RX 580 8847
+10.8%

T2000 Mobile 7985

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.

RX 580 19274
+42.5%

T2000 Mobile 13524

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 HD	96 +12.9%	85−90 −12.9%
1440p	44 +25.7%	35−40 −25.7%
4K	38 +26.7%	30−35 −26.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.39	no data
1440p	5.20	no data
4K	6.03	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +13.5%	35−40 −13.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +12.2%	40−45 −12.2%
Elden Ring	75−80 +13.6%	65−70 −13.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	80 +21.2%	65−70 −21.2%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +13.5%	35−40 −13.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +12.2%	40−45 −12.2%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +12.5%	85−90 −12.5%
Metro Exodus	83 +48.2%	55−60 −48.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +8.5%	45−50 −8.5%
Valorant	90−95 +10.7%	80−85 −10.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	117 +77.3%	65−70 −77.3%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +13.5%	35−40 −13.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +12.2%	40−45 −12.2%
Dota 2	51 −43.1%	70−75 +43.1%
Elden Ring	75−80 +13.6%	65−70 −13.6%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +7.4%	65−70 −7.4%
Fortnite	110−120 +8.3%	100−110 −8.3%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +12.5%	85−90 −12.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	77 +5.5%	70−75 −5.5%
Metro Exodus	57 +1.8%	55−60 −1.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	202 +46.4%	130−140 −46.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +8.5%	45−50 −8.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	70−75 +12.1%	65−70 −12.1%
Valorant	90−95 +10.7%	80−85 −10.7%
World of Tanks	240−250 +5.5%	230−240 −5.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	68 +3%	65−70 −3%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +13.5%	35−40 −13.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +12.2%	40−45 −12.2%
Dota 2	80−85 +9.6%	70−75 −9.6%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +7.4%	65−70 −7.4%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +12.5%	85−90 −12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70 −97.1%	130−140 +97.1%
Valorant	90−95 +10.7%	80−85 −10.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 +15.2%	30−35 −15.2%
Elden Ring	40−45 +14.3%	35−40 −14.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +11.8%	30−35 −11.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +1.2%	170−180 −1.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +10.5%	18−20 −10.5%
World of Tanks	150−160 +10%	140−150 −10%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +11.9%	40−45 −11.9%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +11.8%	16−18 −11.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +11.8%	16−18 −11.8%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +14%	55−60 −14%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 +11.1%	50−55 −11.1%
Metro Exodus	53 +12.8%	45−50 −12.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +13.8%	27−30 −13.8%
Valorant	60−65 +13%	50−55 −13%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +17.6%	16−18 −17.6%
Dota 2	57 +62.9%	35−40 −62.9%
Elden Ring	18−20 +20%	14−16 −20%
Grand Theft Auto V	57 +62.9%	35−40 −62.9%
Metro Exodus	18 +20%	14−16 −20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	73 +17.7%	60−65 −17.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +15.4%	12−14 −15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	57 +62.9%	35−40 −62.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	28 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +17.6%	16−18 −17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Dota 2	35−40 +11.4%	35−40 −11.4%
Far Cry 5	30−33 +11.1%	27−30 −11.1%
Fortnite	31 +24%	24−27 −24%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +12.9%	30−35 −12.9%
Valorant	27−30 +16%	24−27 −16%

This is how RX 580 and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

RX 580 is 13% faster in 1080p
RX 580 is 26% faster in 1440p
RX 580 is 27% faster in 4K

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 580 is 77% faster.
in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 97% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 580 is ahead in 61 test (97%)
T2000 Mobile is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	23.01	20.77
Recency	18 April 2017	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	185 Watt	60 Watt