NVIDIA Quadro M2000M vs ATI Radeon E4690
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and ATI Radeon E4690 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 M2000M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 72% higher core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 600 MHz
- 2.3x more texture fill rate: 43.92 GTexel / s vs 19.2 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 640 vs 320
- 3.7x better floating-point performance: 1,405 gflops vs 384.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 8x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 512 MB
- 3.6x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1400 MHz
- 8.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3450 vs 405
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3302
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3302
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 3 December 2015 vs 1 June 2009 |
Core clock speed | 1029 MHz vs 600 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 43.92 GTexel / s vs 19.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 640 vs 320 |
Floating-point performance | 1,405 gflops vs 384.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 512 MB |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1400 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3450 vs 405 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3302 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3302 |
Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon E4690
- Around 83% lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 55 Watt
- Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 347 vs 338
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 55 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 347 vs 338 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
GPU 2: ATI Radeon E4690
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | ATI Radeon E4690 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3450 | 405 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 338 | 347 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8148 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 47.281 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 782.113 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.5 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.048 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 172.896 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4920 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3302 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4920 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3302 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | ATI Radeon E4690 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale |
Code name | GM107 | RV730 |
Launch date | 3 December 2015 | 1 June 2009 |
Place in performance rating | 717 | 719 |
Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1098 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 1029 MHz | 600 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,405 gflops | 384.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 320 |
Texture fill rate | 43.92 GTexel / s | 19.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 30 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,870 million | 514 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-II |
Laptop size | large | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 10.1 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 80 GB / s | 22.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1400 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |