NVIDIA Quadro P1000 vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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

• Around 18% higher core clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 1076 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 16 nm
• Around 60% lower typical power consumption: 47 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3702 vs 3681
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3348 vs 3316
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3702 vs 3681
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3348 vs 3316

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P2000

• Around 60% higher texture fill rate: 94.72 GTexel / s vs 59.2 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 768 vs 512
• Around 60% better floating-point performance: 3,031 gflops vs 1,894 gflops
• Around 25% higher maximum memory size: 5 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 5012 MHz
• Around 55% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6957 vs 4500
• Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 630 vs 590
• Around 46% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 22896 vs 15667
• Around 58% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 113.416 vs 71.86
• Around 70% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1414.794 vs 832.248
• Around 67% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.736 vs 4.039
• Around 25% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 81.206 vs 65.117
• Around 70% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 417.823 vs 245.081
• Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10251 vs 6796
• Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10251 vs 6796
• Around 86% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2958 vs 1591

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	4500 6957
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	590 630
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	15667 22896
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	71.86 113.416
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	832.248 1414.794
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4.039 6.736
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	65.117 81.206
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	245.081 417.823
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6796 10251
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3702 3681
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3348 3316
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6796 10251
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3702 3681
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3348 3316
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	1591 2958

Compare specifications (specs)