NVIDIA Quadro P400 vs NVIDIA Quadro K2000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P400 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000 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 P400

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• Around 29% higher core clock speed: 1228 MHz vs 954 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 70% lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 51 Watt
• Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1651 vs 1578
• Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 435 vs 385
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 19.856 vs 14.332
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 309.824 vs 265.424
• Around 26% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.38 vs 1.093
• Around 67% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 25.011 vs 15.009
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 84.489 vs 38.219
• Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2709 vs 2446
• Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2875 vs 1631
• Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3328 vs 1974
• Around 11% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2709 vs 2446
• Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2875 vs 1631
• Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3328 vs 1974

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K2000

• Around 44% higher texture fill rate: 30.53 GTexel / s vs 21.25 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 384 vs 256
• Around 8% better floating-point performance: 732.7 gflops vs 679.9 gflops
• Around 33% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4071 vs 3053

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P400
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1651 1578
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	435 385
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3053 4071
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	19.856 14.332
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	309.824 265.424
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.38 1.093
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	25.011 15.009
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	84.489 38.219
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2709 2446
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2875 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3328 1974
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2709 2446
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2875 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3328 1974

Compare specifications (specs)