AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• Around 28% higher texture fill rate: 39.01 GTexel / s vs 30.53 GTexel / s
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 512 vs 384
• Around 70% better floating-point performance: 1,248 gflops vs 732.7 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 75% higher memory clock speed: 7000 MHz vs 4000 MHz
• Around 19% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1871 vs 1578
• Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 387 vs 385
• 2.5x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10293 vs 4071
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 30.848 vs 14.332
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 438.581 vs 265.424
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.268 vs 1.093
• 3.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 46.988 vs 15.009
• 3.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.235 vs 38.219
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3241 vs 2446
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3709 vs 1631
• Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 1974
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3241 vs 2446
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3709 vs 1631
• Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 1974

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2000

• Around 3% higher core clock speed: 954 MHz vs 925 MHz
• Around 27% lower typical power consumption: 51 Watt vs 65 Watt

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon PRO WX 2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1871 1578
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	387 385
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	10293 4071
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.848 14.332
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	438.581 265.424
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.268 1.093
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	46.988 15.009
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.235 38.219
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 2446
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 1974
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3241 2446
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3709 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 1974

Compare specifications (specs)