NVIDIA Quadro K2000D vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K2000D and NVIDIA Quadro 5000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 0 month(s) later
• Around 86% higher core clock speed: 954 MHz vs 513 MHz
• Around 35% higher texture fill rate: 30.53 GTexel / s vs 22.57 GTexel / s
• Around 9% higher pipelines: 384 vs 352
• Around 1% better floating-point performance: 732.7 gflops vs 722.3 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 3x lower typical power consumption: 51 Watt vs 152 Watt
• Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 3000 MHz
• Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 406 vs 388
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2646 vs 2602
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3493 vs 3104
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3339 vs 3316
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2646 vs 2602
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3493 vs 3104
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3339 vs 3316

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 5000

• Around 25% higher maximum memory size: 2560 MB vs 2 GB
• Around 22% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1934 vs 1586
• Around 86% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 7376 vs 3973
• Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 16.451 vs 14.283
• Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 511.131 vs 386.006
• Around 89% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.925 vs 1.018
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 17.065 vs 15.605
• Around 50% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 46.591 vs 31.155

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 5000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1586 1934
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	406 388
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3973 7376
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	14.283 16.451
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	386.006 511.131
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.018 1.925
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.605 17.065
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	31.155 46.591
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2646 2602
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3493 3104
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3339 3316
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2646 2602
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3493 3104
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3339 3316

Compare specifications (specs)