NVIDIA Quadro K2000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 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 5 month(s) later
• 2.7x lower typical power consumption: 51 Watt vs 140 Watt
• 666.7x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 6.0 GB/s

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660

• Around 3% higher core clock speed: 980 MHz vs 954 MHz
• 2.6x more texture fill rate: 78.4 billion / sec vs 30.53 GTexel / s
• 2.5x more pipelines: 960 vs 384
• 2.7x better floating-point performance: 1,981 gflops vs 732.7 gflops
• 2.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4017 vs 1578
• Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 487 vs 385
• 2.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11364 vs 4071
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 30.505 vs 14.332
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 705.293 vs 265.424
• 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.085 vs 1.093
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.416 vs 15.009
• Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 62.69 vs 38.219
• Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3581 vs 2446
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3690 vs 1631
• Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3365 vs 1974
• Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3581 vs 2446
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3690 vs 1631
• Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3365 vs 1974

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1578 4017
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	385 487
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	4071 11364
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.332 30.505
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	265.424 705.293
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.093 3.085
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.009 35.416
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.219 62.69
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2446 3581
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1631 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1974 3365
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2446 3581
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1631 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1974 3365

Compare specifications (specs)