NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q vs AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q and AMD Radeon Pro 5300M 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: GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q
- Around 20% higher core clock speed: 1200 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- Around 30% higher boost clock speed: 1620 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- Around 4% higher texture fill rate: 103.7 GTexel/s vs 100 GTexel/s
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 85 Watt
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3703 vs 3595
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3703 vs 3595
- Around 40% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 41046 vs 29361
- Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6871 vs 5929
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1200 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1620 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 103.7 GTexel/s vs 100 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt vs 85 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3703 vs 3595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3703 vs 3595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 3350 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41046 vs 29361 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6871 vs 5929 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 month(s) later
- Around 25% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 1024
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 12 nm
- 6x more memory clock speed: 12000 MHz vs 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective)
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7730 vs 7682
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7730 vs 7682
- Around 45% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 587 vs 405
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 Nov 2019 vs 27 May 2019 |
| Pipelines | 1280 vs 1024 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 12 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz vs 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7730 vs 7682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7730 vs 7682 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 587 vs 405 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q | AMD Radeon Pro 5300M |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7682 | 7730 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7682 | 7730 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3703 | 3595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3703 | 3595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3350 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41046 | 29361 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 405 | 587 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6871 | 5929 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q | AMD Radeon Pro 5300M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 1.0 |
| Code name | TU117 | Navi 14 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 13 Nov 2019 |
| Place in performance rating | 395 | 369 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1620 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 103.7 GFLOPS (1:32) | 200 GFLOPS (1:16) |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 6.636 TFLOPS (2:1) | 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1) |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.318 TFLOPS | 3.200 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 1280 |
| Pixel fill rate | 51.84 GPixel/s | 40 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate | 103.7 GTexel/s | 100 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt | 85 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 6400 million |
| Compute units | 20 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Width | IGP | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 192 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective) | 12000 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q with others
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Max-Q vs
ATIFireGL V8600
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon HD 7730
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Ti
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Max-Q vs
AMDFirePro W8100
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon RX 560X
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200 Max-Q
