NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile 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, 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, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 23% higher core clock speed: 1328 MHz vs 1076 MHz
- Around 2% higher texture fill rate: 96.8 GTexel / s vs 94.72 GTexel / s
- Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
- Around 2% better floating-point performance: 3,098 gflops vs 3,031 gflops
- Around 20% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 5 GB
- Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8920 vs 6935
- Around 44% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 32521 vs 22509
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12948 vs 10251
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3718 vs 3681
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3316
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12948 vs 10251
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3718 vs 3681
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3316
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 21 February 2018 vs 6 February 2017 |
| Core clock speed | 1328 MHz vs 1076 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 96.8 GTexel / s vs 94.72 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1280 vs 768 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,098 gflops vs 3,031 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 6 GB vs 5 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 7012 MHz vs 7008 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8920 vs 6935 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 32521 vs 22509 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12948 vs 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 vs 3681 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12948 vs 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 vs 3681 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3316 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P2000
- Around 41% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 644 vs 457
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz vs 1476 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 644 vs 457 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2000
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8920 | 6935 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 457 | 644 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 32521 | 22509 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12948 | 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 3681 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3316 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12948 | 10251 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 3681 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3316 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 2958 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 113.416 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1414.794 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.736 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 81.206 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 417.823 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
| Code name | GP104 | GP106 |
| Launch date | 21 February 2018 | 6 February 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 334 | 394 |
| Type | Workstation | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $585 | |
| Price now | $429.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 19.44 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1476 MHz | 1480 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1328 MHz | 1076 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,098 gflops | 3,031 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 16 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | 768 |
| Texture fill rate | 96.8 GTexel / s | 94.72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Transistor count | 7,200 million | 4,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 201 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 5 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 168.3 GB / s | 140.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7012 MHz | 7008 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro P3200 Mobile with others
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Mobile vs
AMDFirePro W9000
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 580
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 570X
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 580 2048SP
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Mobile vs
NVIDIACMP 30HX
