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 52% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 34273 vs 22528
- 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 | 34273 vs 22528 |
| 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 | 34273 | 22528 |
| 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 | 6934 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 644 | |
| 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 | 392 | 394 |
| 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
ATIMobility Radeon HD 550v
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
AMDRadeon HD 7690M
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX TITAN Z
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAQuadro P2000
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000
AMDRadeon Pro 575X vs
AMDRadeon RX 5500M
