NVIDIA Quadro M2000 vs AMD Radeon R9 M290X

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000 and AMD Radeon R9 M290X 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 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 29% higher boost clock speed: 1163 MHz vs 900 MHz
• Around 33% lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 100 Watt
• 5.5x more memory clock speed: 6612 MHz vs 1200 MHz
• Around 23% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3999 vs 3263
• Around 33% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 568 vs 426
• Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.048 vs 51.022
• Around 43% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3684 vs 2581
• Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3325 vs 2526
• Around 43% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3684 vs 2581
• Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3325 vs 2526

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M290X

• Around 7% higher core clock speed: 850 MHz vs 796 MHz
• Around 27% higher texture fill rate: 72 GTexel / s vs 56.64 GTexel / s
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
• Around 27% better floating-point performance: 2,304 gflops vs 1,812 gflops
• Around 59% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 22299 vs 14036
• Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 936.497 vs 639.056
• Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.62 vs 3.697
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 77.584 vs 35.796
• Around 14% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 258.046 vs 225.868
• Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6666 vs 5523
• Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6666 vs 5523

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M290X

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3999 3263
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	568 426
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	14036 22299
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	55.048 51.022
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	639.056 936.497
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.697 5.62
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.796 77.584
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	225.868 258.046
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5523 6666
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3684 2581
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3325 2526
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5523 6666
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3684 2581
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3325 2526

Compare specifications (specs)