NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile vs AMD Radeon Pro 580X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile and AMD Radeon Pro 580X 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, 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 T2000 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
- Around 43% higher core clock speed: 1575 MHz vs 1100 MHz
- Around 49% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 150 Watt
- 4.7x more memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 1695 MHz (6780 MHz effective)
- Around 9% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 38863 vs 35755
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 vs 3643
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 vs 3643
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 18 March 2019 |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz vs 1100 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 150 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 1695 MHz (6780 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 vs 35755 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 vs 3643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 vs 3643 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 580X
- Around 51% higher texture fill rate: 172.8 GTexel/s vs 114.2 GTexel/s
- 2.3x more pipelines: 2304 vs 1024
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7540 vs 7235
- Around 62% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 698 vs 430
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 172.8 GTexel/s vs 114.2 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 2304 vs 1024 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7540 vs 7235 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 698 vs 430 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3360 vs 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3360 vs 3353 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro 580X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7235 | 7540 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 430 | 698 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 | 35755 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3360 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3360 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3319 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon Pro 580X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
| Code name | TU117 | Polaris 20 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 18 March 2019 |
| Place in performance rating | 362 | 365 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 114.2 GFLOPS | 345.6 GFLOPS |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.311 TFLOPS | 5.530 TFLOPS |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.656 TFLOPS | 5.530 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 2304 |
| Pixel fill rate | 57.12 GPixel/s | 38.40 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | 172.8 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 5700 million |
| Compute units | 36 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 217.0 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 1695 MHz (6780 MHz effective) |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile with others
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro K6000
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGRID M60-8Q
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 480
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIATitan X Pascal
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 580 (Laptop)
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon Pro 580X
