NVIDIA Quadro P2000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P2000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop) 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 P2000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 5 month(s) later
• Around 60% lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 120 Watt
• Around 42% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 632 vs 444
• Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 113.416 vs 111.55
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1414.794 vs 1371.266
• 4.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 81.206 vs 19.803
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3681 vs 3654
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3681 vs 3654

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)

• Around 40% higher core clock speed: 1506 MHz vs 1076 MHz
• Around 15% higher boost clock speed: 1708 MHz vs 1480 MHz
• Around 41% higher texture fill rate: 133.6 GTexel / s vs 94.72 GTexel / s
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
• Around 41% better floating-point performance: 4,275 gflops vs 3,031 gflops
• Around 20% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 5 GB
• Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 8008 MHz vs 7008 MHz
• Around 18% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8161 vs 6932
• Around 35% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 30914 vs 22895
• Around 26% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.49 vs 6.736
• Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 509.222 vs 417.823
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12645 vs 10251
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3359 vs 3316
• Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12645 vs 10251
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3359 vs 3316
• Around 24% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3671 vs 2958

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Laptop)

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	6932 8161
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	632 444
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	22895 30914
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	113.416 111.55
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1414.794 1371.266
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	6.736 8.49
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	81.206 19.803
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	417.823 509.222
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10251 12645
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3681 3654
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3316 3359
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10251 12645
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3681 3654
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3316 3359
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	2958 3671

Compare specifications (specs)