NVIDIA Quadro P1000 vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and NVIDIA Quadro M2000 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 P1000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
• Around 59% higher core clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 796 MHz
• Around 27% higher boost clock speed: 1480 MHz vs 1163 MHz
• Around 5% higher texture fill rate: 59.2 GTexel / s vs 56.64 GTexel / s
• Around 5% better floating-point performance: 1,894 gflops vs 1,812 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 60% lower typical power consumption: 47 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4500 vs 4000
• Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 590 vs 565
• Around 7% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 15667 vs 14591
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 71.86 vs 55.048
• Around 30% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 832.248 vs 639.056
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.039 vs 3.697
• Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.117 vs 35.796
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 245.081 vs 225.868
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6796 vs 5523
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3348 vs 3325
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6796 vs 5523
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3348 vs 3325

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M2000

• Around 50% higher pipelines: 768 vs 512
• Around 32% higher memory clock speed: 6612 MHz vs 5012 MHz

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	4500 4000
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	590 565
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	15667 14591
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	71.86 55.048
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	832.248 639.056
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.039 3.697
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	65.117 35.796
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	245.081 225.868
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6796 5523
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3702 3684
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3348 3325
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6796 5523
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3702 3684
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3348 3325

Compare specifications (specs)