Quadro K2000D vs Tesla K20c

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tesla K20c and Quadro K2000D, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Tesla K20c
2012
5 GB GDDR5, 225 Watt
8.95
+117%

Tesla K20c outperforms K2000D by a whopping 117% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking490691
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.370.42
Power efficiency2.735.54
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK110GK107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date12 November 2012 (12 years ago)1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,199 $599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K2000D has 14% better value for money than Tesla K20c.

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 cores2496384
Core clock speed706 MHz954 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt51 Watt
Texture fill rate146.830.53
Floating-point processing power3.524 TFLOPS0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs4016
TMUs20832

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 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length267 mm202 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 amount5 GB2 GB
Memory bus width320 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth208.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA3.53.0

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.

Tesla K20c 8.95
+117%
K2000D 4.12

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Tesla K20c 60
+400%
K2000D 12

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.95 4.12
Recency 12 November 2012 1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 51 Watt

Tesla K20c has a 117.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 150% higher maximum VRAM amount.

K2000D, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, and 341.2% lower power consumption.

The Tesla K20c is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000D in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA Tesla K20c
Tesla K20c
NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
Quadro K2000D

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.


4.7 12 votes

Rate Tesla K20c on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 14 votes

Rate Quadro K2000D 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.