NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro P3000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro P3000 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 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- Around 45% higher core clock speed: 1575 MHz vs 1088 MHz
- Around 47% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1215 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 16 nm
- Around 25% lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 7008 MHz
- Around 14% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7235 vs 6366
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 430 vs 404
- Around 50% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 38863 vs 25862
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 11 January 2017 |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz vs 1088 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1215 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 16 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 7008 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7235 vs 6366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 430 vs 404 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 vs 25862 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P3000
- Around 25% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 1024
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9579 vs 9313
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 vs 3698
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9579 vs 9313
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 vs 3698
- Around 5% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3489 vs 3319
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 1280 vs 1024 |
| Maximum memory size | 6 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9579 vs 9313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3360 vs 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9579 vs 9313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3360 vs 3353 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3489 vs 3319 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P3000
| 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 | NVIDIA Quadro P3000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7235 | 6366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 430 | 404 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 | 25862 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 | 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3360 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 | 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3360 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3319 | 3489 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro P3000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Code name | TU117 | N17E-Q1 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 11 January 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 362 | 377 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1215 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 1088 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 16 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 | 1280 |
| Pixel fill rate | 57.12 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | |
| Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 168 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 7008 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Stereo | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
