NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q 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 - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 month(s) later
- Around 17% higher core clock speed: 1035 MHz vs 885 MHz
- Around 30% higher boost clock speed: 1545 MHz vs 1185 MHz
- Around 33% higher pipelines: 3072 vs 2304
- Around 5% lower typical power consumption: 110 Watt vs 115 Watt
- Around 49% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 705 vs 472
- Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 14832 vs 11609
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 19565 vs 17328
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 19565 vs 17328
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 29 January 2019 |
Core clock speed | 1035 MHz vs 885 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1545 MHz vs 1185 MHz |
Pipelines | 3072 vs 2304 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt vs 115 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 705 vs 472 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14832 vs 11609 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19565 vs 17328 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19565 vs 17328 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8055 vs 3346
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8055 vs 3346
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8912 vs 3714
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8912 vs 3714
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8055 vs 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8055 vs 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8912 vs 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8912 vs 3714 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 705 | 472 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14832 | 11609 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19565 | 17328 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19565 | 17328 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 8055 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 8055 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 8912 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 8912 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 6796 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 76209 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 168.08 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1935.102 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 22.794 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 111.023 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1001.496 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | Turing |
Code name | TU104 | TU106 |
Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 29 January 2019 |
Place in performance rating | 186 | 189 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1545 MHz | 1185 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1035 MHz | 885 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 296.6 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 18.98 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.492 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 3072 | 2304 |
Pixel fill rate | 98.88 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 296.6 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt | 115 Watt |
Transistor count | 13600 million | 10,800 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Width | IGP | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 448 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 256 bit | 256 Bit |
Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz |