Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon RX Vega 10

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 10 with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 10
2019
10 Watt
4.24

T2000 Mobile outperforms RX Vega 10 by a whopping 389% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking682266
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency29.0723.67
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRavenTU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date8 January 2019 (5 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 cores6401024
Core clock speed300 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1301 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate52.04114.2
Floating-point processing power1.665 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs4064

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
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 Vega 10 4.24
T2000 Mobile 20.72
+389%

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 Vega 10 1632
T2000 Mobile 7985
+389%

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 Vega 10 3389
T2000 Mobile 13524
+299%

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 HD17
−371%
80−85
+371%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12
−175%
30−35
+175%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9
−411%
45−50
+411%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12
−192%
35−40
+192%
Battlefield 5 17
−300%
65−70
+300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 15
−180%
40−45
+180%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−267%
30−35
+267%
Far Cry 5 11
−336%
45−50
+336%
Far Cry New Dawn 18
−206%
55−60
+206%
Forza Horizon 4 45
−182%
120−130
+182%
Hitman 3 9
−356%
40−45
+356%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−254%
95−100
+254%
Metro Exodus 21
−238%
70−75
+238%
Red Dead Redemption 2 19
−189%
55−60
+189%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20
−245%
65−70
+245%
Watch Dogs: Legion 63
−47.6%
90−95
+47.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
−229%
45−50
+229%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8
−338%
35−40
+338%
Battlefield 5 8
−750%
65−70
+750%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14
−200%
40−45
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−560%
30−35
+560%
Far Cry 5 9
−433%
45−50
+433%
Far Cry New Dawn 7
−686%
55−60
+686%
Forza Horizon 4 34
−274%
120−130
+274%
Hitman 3 10−11
−310%
40−45
+310%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−254%
95−100
+254%
Metro Exodus 18
−294%
70−75
+294%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
−224%
55−60
+224%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
−393%
65−70
+393%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−188%
45−50
+188%
Watch Dogs: Legion 41
−127%
90−95
+127%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−283%
45−50
+283%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10
−320%
40−45
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−371%
30−35
+371%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−433%
45−50
+433%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−388%
120−130
+388%
Hitman 3 10−11
−310%
40−45
+310%
Horizon Zero Dawn 11
−800%
95−100
+800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
−475%
65−70
+475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
−475%
45−50
+475%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−111%
90−95
+111%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−400%
55−60
+400%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−400%
40−45
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−433%
30−35
+433%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−425%
21−24
+425%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−667%
21−24
+667%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−1833%
110−120
+1833%
Hitman 3 9−10
−167%
24−27
+167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−320%
40−45
+320%
Metro Exodus 0−1 35−40
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
−365%
120−130
+365%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−325%
30−35
+325%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−567%
20−22
+567%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%
Hitman 3 0−1 16−18
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−10600%
100−110
+10600%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−2100%
21−24
+2100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 4−5
Far Cry 5 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−833%
27−30
+833%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−800%
9−10
+800%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how RX Vega 10 and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 371% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 10600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 65 tests (94%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.24 20.72
Recency 8 January 2019 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 60 Watt

RX Vega 10 has 500% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 388.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 10 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 10 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.

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 RX Vega 10
Radeon RX Vega 10
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

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.


3.4 1073 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 10 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 394 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.