AMD FirePro V3900 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro V3900 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro V3900

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
• Around 18% higher core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 550 MHz
• 2.5x more pipelines: 480 vs 192
• Around 48% better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 422.4 gflops
• Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 237 vs 230
• Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 279.435 vs 272.707
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 58.58 vs 27.158
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1311 vs 1261
• Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2569
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1311 vs 1261
• Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2569

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

• Around 13% higher texture fill rate: 17.6 GTexel / s vs 15.6 GTexel / s
• 3.6x lower typical power consumption: 55 Watt vs 199 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 767 vs 640
• 2.2x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3421 vs 1564
• Around 79% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.306 vs 4.646
• Around 83% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.855 vs 0.468
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 14.423 vs 13.784
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1926 vs 1631
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1926 vs 1631

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD FirePro V3900
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	640 767
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	237 230
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	1564 3421
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.646 8.306
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	279.435 272.707
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.468 0.855
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13.784 14.423
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	58.58 27.158
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1311 1261
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1631 1926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 2569
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1311 1261
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1631 1926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 2569

Compare specifications (specs)