NVIDIA Quadro K600 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro K600 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000 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 K600

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 40% higher core clock speed: 876 MHz vs 625 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• Around 51% lower typical power consumption: 41 Watt vs 62 Watt
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1745 vs 1682
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1745 vs 1682

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 2000

• Around 43% higher texture fill rate: 20 GTexel / s vs 14.02 GTexel / s
• Around 43% better floating-point performance: 480.0 gflops vs 336.4 gflops
• Around 46% higher memory clock speed: 2600 MHz vs 1782 MHz
• Around 30% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 947 vs 728
• Around 9% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 303 vs 278
• 2.1x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3879 vs 1830
• Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 10.229 vs 6.367
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 258.26 vs 118.389
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.885 vs 0.396
• Around 73% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.688 vs 7.921
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 19.02 vs 9.393
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1600 vs 1227
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2668 vs 2261
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1600 vs 1227
• Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2668 vs 2261

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K600
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	728 947
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	278 303
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	1830 3879
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6.367 10.229
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	118.389 258.26
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.396 0.885
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.921 13.688
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9.393 19.02
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1227 1600
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1745 1682
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2261 2668
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1227 1600
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1745 1682
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2261 2668

Compare specifications (specs)