NVIDIA Quadro P2000 vs AMD FirePro W8100

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P2000 and AMD FirePro W8100 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 P2000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 7 month(s) later
• Around 31% higher core clock speed: 1076 MHz vs 824 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 28 nm
• 2.9x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 220 Watt
• Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 5000 MHz
• Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6948 vs 6672
• Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 113.416 vs 93.339
• Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10251 vs 5494
• Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10251 vs 5494

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W8100

• Around 39% higher texture fill rate: 131.8 GTexel / s vs 94.72 GTexel / s
• 3.3x more pipelines: 2560 vs 768
• Around 39% better floating-point performance: 4,219 gflops vs 3,031 gflops
• Around 60% higher maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 5 GB
• Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 723 vs 631
• Around 52% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 34705 vs 22884
• Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2333.922 vs 1414.794
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.816 vs 6.736
• Around 38% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 112.45 vs 81.206
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 440.107 vs 417.823
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 3316
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 3316

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P2000
GPU 2: AMD FirePro W8100

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	6948 6672
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	631 723
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	22884 34705
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	113.416 93.339
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1414.794 2333.922
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6.736 8.816
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	81.206 112.45
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	417.823 440.107
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10251 5494
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3681 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3316 3349
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10251 5494
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3681 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3316 3349

Compare specifications (specs)