AMD Radeon Pro 575X vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro 575X and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 575X
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- 1481.2x more texture fill rate: 140.3 GTexel/s vs 94.72 GTexel / s
- 2.7x more pipelines: 2048 vs 768
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 16 nm
- Around 53% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 35084 vs 22889
- Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11237 vs 10251
- Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11237 vs 10251
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3316
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3316
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 18 March 2019 vs 6 February 2017 |
| Texture fill rate | 140.3 GTexel/s vs 94.72 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 768 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 16 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 35084 vs 22889 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11237 vs 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11237 vs 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3316 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P2000
- Around 60% lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 120 Watt
- Around 25% higher maximum memory size: 5 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3681 vs 3458
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3681 vs 3458
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 120 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 5 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3681 vs 3458 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3681 vs 3458 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 575X
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2000
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro 575X | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 35084 | 22889 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11237 | 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11237 | 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3458 | 3681 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3458 | 3681 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3316 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6927 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 635 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 113.416 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1414.794 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.736 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 81.206 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 417.823 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2958 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro 575X | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Pascal |
| Code name | Polaris 20 | GP106 |
| Launch date | 18 March 2019 | 6 February 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 400 | 403 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $585 | |
| Price now | $429.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 19.44 | |
Technical info |
||
| Compute units | 32 | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 16 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 280.6 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 4.489 TFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 4.489 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2048 | 768 |
| Pixel fill rate | 35.07 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 140.3 GTexel/s | 94.72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5700 million | 4,400 million |
| Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1076 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,031 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 201 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 5 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 217.6 GB/s | 140.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon Pro 575X with others
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 5500
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX TITAN Z
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAQuadro P2000
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200 Max-Q
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
AMDRadeon RX 5500M
