Quadro P2000 vs Titan X Pascal

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal with Quadro P2000, including specs and performance data.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.76
+79.2%

Titan X Pascal outperforms P2000 by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking155291
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.879.64
Power efficiency9.3317.36
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGP102GP106
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)6 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 $585

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P2000 has 40% better value for money than Titan X Pascal.

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 cores35841024
Core clock speed1417 MHz1076 MHz
Boost clock speed1531 MHz1480 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million4,400 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate342.994.72
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPS3.031 TFLOPS
ROPs9640
TMUs22464

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 3.0 x16
Length267 mm201 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 typeGDDR5XGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount12 GB5 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speed1251 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/s140.2 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++
CUDA+6.1

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.

Titan X Pascal 33.76
+79.2%
Quadro P2000 18.84

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.

Titan X Pascal 13026
+79.2%
Quadro P2000 7268

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.

Titan X Pascal 35981
+329%
Quadro P2000 8387

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Titan X Pascal 100948
+206%
Quadro P2000 32964

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Titan X Pascal 27349
+299%
Quadro P2000 6847

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Titan X Pascal 136891
+214%
Quadro P2000 43566

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Titan X Pascal 514513
+46.9%
Quadro P2000 350317

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 HD127
+131%
55
−131%
1440p71
+223%
22
−223%
4K57
+217%
18
−217%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.4410.64
1440p16.8926.59
4K21.0432.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 79
+163%
30−33
−163%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 104
+148%
40−45
−148%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 95
+206%
30−35
−206%
Battlefield 5 174
+181%
60−65
−181%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 108
+184%
35−40
−184%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+160%
30−33
−160%
Far Cry 5 121
+188%
42
−188%
Far Cry New Dawn 138
+171%
50−55
−171%
Forza Horizon 4 240
+103%
110−120
−103%
Hitman 3 104
+181%
35−40
−181%
Horizon Zero Dawn 296
+222%
90−95
−222%
Metro Exodus 143
+120%
65−70
−120%
Red Dead Redemption 2 125
+145%
50−55
−145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 161
+109%
77
−109%
Watch Dogs: Legion 226
+157%
85−90
−157%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 121
+188%
40−45
−188%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
+174%
30−35
−174%
Battlefield 5 165
+166%
60−65
−166%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 98
+158%
35−40
−158%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+130%
30−33
−130%
Far Cry 5 92
+179%
33
−179%
Far Cry New Dawn 108
+112%
50−55
−112%
Forza Horizon 4 225
+90.7%
110−120
−90.7%
Hitman 3 104
+181%
35−40
−181%
Horizon Zero Dawn 275
+199%
90−95
−199%
Metro Exodus 143
+120%
65−70
−120%
Red Dead Redemption 2 102
+100%
50−55
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 194
+213%
60−65
−213%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
+123%
40−45
−123%
Watch Dogs: Legion 216
+145%
85−90
−145%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 67
+59.5%
40−45
−59.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 63
+103%
30−35
−103%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75
+97.4%
35−40
−97.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+96.7%
30−33
−96.7%
Far Cry 5 67
+158%
26
−158%
Forza Horizon 4 112
−5.4%
110−120
+5.4%
Hitman 3 93
+151%
35−40
−151%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150
+63%
90−95
−63%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167
+169%
60−65
−169%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
+280%
25
−280%
Watch Dogs: Legion 64
−37.5%
85−90
+37.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 118
+131%
50−55
−131%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+77.8%
35−40
−77.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+75.9%
27−30
−75.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+89.5%
18−20
−89.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+200%
16−18
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 58
+176%
21−24
−176%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+245%
10−12
−245%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+179%
14
−179%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+85.6%
100−110
−85.6%
Hitman 3 66
+200%
21−24
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
+211%
35−40
−211%
Metro Exodus 101
+189%
35−40
−189%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 122
+221%
35−40
−221%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%
Watch Dogs: Legion 212
+89.3%
110−120
−89.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 92
+197%
30−35
−197%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 63
+250%
18−20
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 48
+243%
14−16
−243%
Hitman 3 39
+179%
14−16
−179%
Horizon Zero Dawn 129
+33%
95−100
−33%
Metro Exodus 67
+235%
20−22
−235%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+423%
13
−423%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+245%
10−12
−245%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+256%
9−10
−256%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
+240%
10−11
−240%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+350%
4−5
−350%
Far Cry 5 33
+371%
7
−371%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+181%
24−27
−181%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70
+233%
21−24
−233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
+225%
8−9
−225%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 47
+176%
16−18
−176%

This is how Titan X Pascal and Quadro P2000 compete in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is 131% faster in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal is 223% faster in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal is 217% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Titan X Pascal is 423% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P2000 is 38% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • Quadro P2000 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.76 18.84
Recency 2 August 2016 6 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 5 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 75 Watt

Titan X Pascal has a 79.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 140% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro P2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Titan X Pascal is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Titan X Pascal is a desktop card while Quadro P2000 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.


NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
NVIDIA Quadro P2000
Quadro P2000

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.


2.6 2994 votes

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 627 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 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.