NVIDIA Quadro M2000M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 941 MHz
- Around 14% higher boost clock speed: 1098 MHz vs 967 MHz
- Around 82% lower typical power consumption: 55 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
- Around 21% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 337 vs 278
- Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 47.281 vs 34.836
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.5 vs 3.038
- 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 172.896 vs 81.753
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 3 December 2015 vs 12 March 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1029 MHz vs 941 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1098 MHz vs 967 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 3 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 337 vs 278 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 47.281 vs 34.836 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.5 vs 3.038 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 172.896 vs 81.753 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3353 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M
- 2.5x more texture fill rate: 108.3 GTexel / s vs 43.92 GTexel / s
- 2.1x more pipelines: 1344 vs 640
- Around 85% better floating-point performance: 2,599 gflops vs 1,405 gflops
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3480 vs 3451
- Around 56% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12737 vs 8148
- Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 960.114 vs 782.113
- Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 59.57 vs 51.048
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6350 vs 4920
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6350 vs 4920
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 108.3 GTexel / s vs 43.92 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1344 vs 640 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,599 gflops vs 1,405 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3480 vs 3451 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12737 vs 8148 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 960.114 vs 782.113 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 59.57 vs 51.048 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6350 vs 4920 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 vs 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6350 vs 4920 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 vs 3715 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3451 | 3480 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 337 | 278 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8148 | 12737 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 47.281 | 34.836 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 782.113 | 960.114 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.5 | 3.038 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.048 | 59.57 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 172.896 | 81.753 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4920 | 6350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3718 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4920 | 6350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3718 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3353 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1336 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Code name | GM107 | GK104 |
| Launch date | 3 December 2015 | 12 March 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 717 | 718 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1098 MHz | 967 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1029 MHz | 941 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,405 gflops | 2,599 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 1344 |
| Texture fill rate | 43.92 GTexel / s | 108.3 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
| CUDA cores | 1344 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
| 7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | ||
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
| HDCP content protection | ||
| HDMI | ||
| LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
| TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | ||
| VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | large | large |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB / s | 120.0 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
| Standard memory configuration | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Direct Compute | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro M2000M with others
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5100
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 6700 XL
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M vs
ATIRadeon X1650 PRO
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M vs
ATIRadeon X550 XTX
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 870M
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M vs
AMDRadeon Pro 555
