NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile vs AMD Radeon RX 570
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile and AMD Radeon RX 570 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) 1 month(s) later
- Around 70% higher core clock speed: 1575 MHz vs 926-1168 MHz
- Around 48% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1206-1244 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
- Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 7000 MHz
- Around 3% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7153 vs 6967
- Around 8% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 38863 vs 36141
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9313 vs 9172
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 vs 3624
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9313 vs 9172
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 vs 3624
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 18 April 2017 |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz vs 926-1168 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1206-1244 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 150 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 7000 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7153 vs 6967 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 vs 36141 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 vs 9172 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 vs 3624 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 vs 9172 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 vs 3624 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 3346 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 570
- Around 39% higher texture fill rate: 159.23 GTexel/s vs 114.2 GTexel/s
- 2x more pipelines: 2048 vs 1024
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 38% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 626 vs 452
- Around 16% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3862 vs 3319
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 159.23 GTexel/s vs 114.2 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 1024 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 626 vs 452 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3862 vs 3319 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 570
| 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 570 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7153 | 6967 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 452 | 626 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 | 36141 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 | 9172 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3624 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 | 9172 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3624 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3346 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3319 | 3862 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.688 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1083.926 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.251 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 79.029 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 520.089 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon RX 570 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
| Code name | TU117 | Polaris 20 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 18 April 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 368 | 396 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop, Laptop |
| Design | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
| GCN generation | 4th Gen | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $169 | |
| Price now | $149.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 59.00 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1206-1244 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 926-1168 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 | 39.81 GP/s |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | 159.23 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 5,700 million |
| Floating-point performance | 5.1 TFLOPs | |
| Render output units | 32 | |
| Stream Processors | 2048 | |
| Texture Units | 128 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 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 | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 224 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 7000 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| 4K H264 Decode | ||
| 4K H264 Encode | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
| AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| H265/HEVC Decode | ||
| H265/HEVC Encode | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile with others
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
ATIRadeon X800 GT
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 470 (Desktop)
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile vs
IntelArc A570M
