NVIDIA Quadro M2000 vs AMD FirePro V4900

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000 and AMD FirePro V4900 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 5 month(s) later
• 3x more texture fill rate: 56.64 GTexel / s vs 19.2 GTexel / s
• Around 60% higher pipelines: 768 vs 480
• 2.4x better floating-point performance: 1,812 gflops vs 768.0 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 4x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 65% higher memory clock speed: 6612 MHz vs 4000 MHz
• 4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4000 vs 1006
• Around 77% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 565 vs 320
• 7.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14591 vs 1927
• 8.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.048 vs 6.303
• Around 63% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 639.056 vs 392.237
• 6.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.697 vs 0.597
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.796 vs 17.874
• 3.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 225.868 vs 72.818
• 3.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5523 vs 1747
• 3.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5523 vs 1747

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro V4900

• Around 1% higher core clock speed: 800 MHz vs 796 MHz
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3753 vs 3684
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7745 vs 3325
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3753 vs 3684
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7745 vs 3325

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000
GPU 2: AMD FirePro V4900

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	4000 1006
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	565 320
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	14591 1927
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	55.048 6.303
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	639.056 392.237
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.697 0.597
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.796 17.874
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	225.868 72.818
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5523 1747
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3684 3753
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3325 7745
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5523 1747
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3684 3753
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3325 7745

Compare specifications (specs)