NVIDIA Quadro K2000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2000 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 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 NVIDIA Quadro K2000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 11 month(s) later
• Around 12% better floating-point performance: 732.7 gflops vs 652.8 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• 2.2x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1800 MHz
• Around 31% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1577 vs 1207
• Around 63% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 382 vs 235
• Around 6% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4071 vs 3839
• Around 44% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.332 vs 9.947
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.093 vs 0.982
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 38.219 vs 23.111
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2446 vs 2283
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1974 vs 1913
• Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2446 vs 2283
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1974 vs 1913

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M

• Around 13% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 51 Watt
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 340.824 vs 265.424
• Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 18.773 vs 15.009
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3299 vs 1631
• 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3299 vs 1631

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1577 1207
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	382 235
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	4071 3839
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.332 9.947
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	265.424 340.824
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.093 0.982
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.009 18.773
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.219 23.111
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2446 2283
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1631 3299
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1974 1913
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2446 2283
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1631 3299
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1974 1913

Compare specifications (specs)