NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile vs NVIDIA GRID M60-8Q
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile and NVIDIA GRID M60-8Q 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 - 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 3 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 69% higher core clock speed: 1575 MHz vs 930 MHz
- Around 51% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1180 MHz
- 756.3x more texture fill rate: 114.2 GTexel/s vs 151.0 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
- 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 225 Watt
- Around 60% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 5012 MHz
- Around 84% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7135 vs 3884
- Around 40% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 38863 vs 27798
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9313 vs 8909
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9313 vs 8909
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 30 August 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz vs 930 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1180 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s vs 151.0 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 225 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 5012 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7135 vs 3884 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 vs 27798 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 vs 8909 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 vs 8909 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GRID M60-8Q
- 2x more pipelines: 2048 vs 1024
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 37% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 618 vs 452
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 1024 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 618 vs 452 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3709 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 vs 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3709 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 vs 3353 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID M60-8Q
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | NVIDIA GRID M60-8Q |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7135 | 3884 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 452 | 618 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 | 27798 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 | 8909 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3709 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3359 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 | 8909 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3709 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3359 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3319 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | NVIDIA GRID M60-8Q | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | TU117 | GM204 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 30 August 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 368 | 348 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1180 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 930 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 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 | 151.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 5,200 million |
| Floating-point performance | 4,833 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 160.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
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
