NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile vs AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop)
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile and AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) 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, 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 T2000 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 70% higher core clock speed: 1575 MHz vs 926 MHz
- Around 48% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1206 MHz
- 739.6x more texture fill rate: 114.2 GTexel/s vs 154.4 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 120 Watt
- Around 21% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 6600 MHz
- Around 15% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 38863 vs 33729
- Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 vs 2443
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 1674
- Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 vs 2443
- 2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 1674
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 4 August 2016 |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz vs 926 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1206 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s vs 154.4 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 120 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 6600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 vs 33729 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 vs 2443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 1674 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 vs 2443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 1674 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop)
- 2x more pipelines: 2048 vs 1024
- Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7983 vs 7248
- Around 64% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 724 vs 441
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9983 vs 9313
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9983 vs 9313
- Around 11% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3675 vs 3319
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 1024 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7983 vs 7248 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 724 vs 441 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9983 vs 9313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9983 vs 9313 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3675 vs 3319 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop)
| 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 |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7248 | 7983 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 441 | 724 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 | 33729 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 | 9983 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 2443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 1674 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 | 9983 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 2443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 1674 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3319 | 3675 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 111.543 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1817.005 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 9.511 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 99.875 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 511.362 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
| Code name | TU117 | Ellesmere |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 4 August 2016 |
| Place in performance rating | 381 | 379 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Design | Radeon RX 400 Series | |
| GCN generation | 4th Gen | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | |
| Price now | $109.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 100.00 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1206 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 926 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 114.2 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.311 TFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.656 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 2048 |
| Pixel fill rate | 57.12 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | 154.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 5,700 million |
| Compute units | 32 | |
| Floating-point performance | 4.9 TFLOPs | |
| GPU Power | 85-110 Watt | |
| Stream Processors | 2048 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
| Length | 241 mm | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 450 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 211 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 6600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 4K H264 Decode | ||
| 4K H264 Encode | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
| AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| H265/HEVC Decode | ||
| H265/HEVC Encode | ||
| HDMI 2.0b | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile with others
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
ATIRadeon HD 2900 PRO
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTS 150M
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon R9 280X
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon R9 M365X
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 470 (Desktop)
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 5300M
