AMD Radeon RX 570 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX 570 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: 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 RX 570
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
- 1681.1x more texture fill rate: 159.23 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 60% higher maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 5 GB
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6967 vs 6932
- Around 55% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 35449 vs 22895
- Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.251 vs 6.736
- Around 24% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 520.089 vs 417.823
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3346 vs 3316
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 vs 3316
- Around 30% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3858 vs 2958
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 18 April 2017 vs 6 February 2017 |
Texture fill rate | 159.23 GTexel/s vs 94.72 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2048 vs 768 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 16 nm |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 5 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6967 vs 6932 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 35449 vs 22895 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.251 vs 6.736 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 520.089 vs 417.823 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 vs 3316 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 vs 3316 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3858 vs 2958 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P2000
- Around 16% higher core clock speed: 1076 MHz vs 926-1168 MHz
- Around 23% higher boost clock speed: 1480 MHz vs 1206-1244 MHz
- 594.3x better floating-point performance: 3,031 gflops vs 5.1 TFLOPs
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 150 Watt
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 632 vs 626
- Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 113.416 vs 105.688
- Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1414.794 vs 1083.926
- Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 81.206 vs 79.029
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10251 vs 9172
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3681 vs 3624
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10251 vs 9172
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3681 vs 3624
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1076 MHz vs 926-1168 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz vs 1206-1244 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 3,031 gflops vs 5.1 TFLOPs |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 150 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz vs 7000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 632 vs 626 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 113.416 vs 105.688 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1414.794 vs 1083.926 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 81.206 vs 79.029 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10251 vs 9172 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3681 vs 3624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10251 vs 9172 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3681 vs 3624 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 570
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2000
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 |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon RX 570 | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6967 | 6932 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 626 | 632 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 35449 | 22895 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.688 | 113.416 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1083.926 | 1414.794 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.251 | 6.736 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 79.029 | 81.206 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 520.089 | 417.823 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9172 | 10251 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3624 | 3681 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 3316 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9172 | 10251 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3624 | 3681 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 3316 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3858 | 2958 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon RX 570 | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Pascal |
Code name | Polaris 20 | GP106 |
Design | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
GCN generation | 4th Gen | |
Launch date | 18 April 2017 | 6 February 2017 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $169 | $585 |
Place in performance rating | 402 | 403 |
Price now | $149.99 | $429.99 |
Type | Desktop, Laptop | Workstation |
Value for money (0-100) | 59.00 | 19.44 |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1206-1244 MHz | 1480 MHz |
Core clock speed | 926-1168 MHz | 1076 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 5.1 TFLOPs | 3,031 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 16 nm |
Pipelines | 2048 | 768 |
Pixel fill rate | 39.81 GP/s | |
Render output units | 32 | |
Stream Processors | 2048 | |
Texture fill rate | 159.23 GTexel/s | 94.72 GTexel / s |
Texture Units | 128 | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt | 75 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,700 million | 4,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 241 mm | 201 mm |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 450 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 5 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | 140.2 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7000 MHz | 7008 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
CrossFire | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
PowerTune | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) |