NVIDIA Quadro M2000M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M 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.

NVIDIA Quadro M2000M

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M

Videocard is newer: launch date 10 month(s) later
Around 9% higher core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 944 MHz
Around 16% higher boost clock speed: 1098 MHz vs 950 MHz
2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 2500 MHz
Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 782.113 vs 720.592
Around 45% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 2566
Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3337
Around 45% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 2566
Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3337

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	3 December 2015 vs 9 January 2015
Core clock speed	1029 MHz vs 944 MHz
Boost clock speed	1098 MHz vs 950 MHz
Maximum memory size	4 GB vs 2 GB
Memory clock speed	5012 MHz vs 2500 MHz
Benchmarks
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	782.113 vs 720.592
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3715 vs 2566
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3355 vs 3337
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3715 vs 2566
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3355 vs 3337

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M

Around 68% higher texture fill rate: 73.6 GTexel / s vs 43.92 GTexel / s
Around 60% higher pipelines: 1024 vs 640
Around 68% better floating-point performance: 2,355 gflops vs 1,405 gflops
Around 10% lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 55 Watt
Around 9% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3775 vs 3466
Around 81% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14739 vs 8148
Around 43% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.59 vs 47.281
Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.903 vs 3.5
Around 14% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.947 vs 51.048
Around 30% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 223.296 vs 171.268
Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5783 vs 4920
Around 18% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5783 vs 4920

Specifications (specs)
Texture fill rate	73.6 GTexel / s vs 43.92 GTexel / s
Pipelines	1024 vs 640
Floating-point performance	2,355 gflops vs 1,405 gflops
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	50 Watt vs 55 Watt
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark	3775 vs 3466
Geekbench - OpenCL	14739 vs 8148
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	67.59 vs 47.281
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	3.903 vs 3.5
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	57.947 vs 51.048
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	223.296 vs 171.268
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	5783 vs 4920
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	5783 vs 4920

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

3466

3775

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

340

Geekbench - OpenCL

GPU 1

GPU 2

8148

14739

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

47.281

67.59

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

782.113

720.592

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3.5

3.903

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

51.048

57.947

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

171.268

223.296

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

4920

5783

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3715

2566

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3355

3337

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

4920

5783

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3715

2566

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3355

3337

Name	NVIDIA Quadro M2000M	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
PassMark - G3D Mark	3466	3775
PassMark - G2D Mark	340	340
Geekbench - OpenCL	8148	14739
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	47.281	67.59
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	782.113	720.592
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	3.5	3.903
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	51.048	57.947
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	171.268	223.296
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	4920	5783
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3715	2566
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3355	3337
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	4920	5783
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3715	2566
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3355	3337
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score		1831

Compare specifications (specs)

	NVIDIA Quadro M2000M	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
Essentials
Architecture	Maxwell	Maxwell 2.0
Code name	GM107	GM204
Launch date	3 December 2015	9 January 2015
Place in performance rating	702	703
Type	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Technical info
Boost clock speed	1098 MHz	950 MHz
Core clock speed	1029 MHz	944 MHz
Floating-point performance	1,405 gflops	2,355 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Pipelines	640	1024
Texture fill rate	43.92 GTexel / s	73.6 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	55 Watt	50 Watt
Transistor count	1,870 million	5,200 million
CUDA cores		1024
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
Display Port	1.2
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support		1
G-SYNC support
HDMI
VGA аnalog display support		1
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 3.0
SLI options		1
API support
DirectX	12	12.0 (12_1)
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
Shader Model	5.0
Vulkan
OpenCL		1.1
Memory
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bandwidth	80 GB / s	80 GB / s
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5012 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Shared memory	0	0
Technologies
3D Vision Pro
Mosaic
nView Display Management
Optimus
Ansel
BatteryBoost
CUDA
DSR
GameStream
GameWorks
GeForce Experience
GeForce ShadowPlay
GPU Boost
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder
SLI