NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro P4200 Mobile
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro P4200 Mobile 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 1 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 28% higher core clock speed: 1575 MHz vs 1227 MHz
- Around 8% higher boost clock speed: 1785 MHz vs 1647 MHz
- 831.1x more texture fill rate: 114.2 GTexel/s vs 137.4 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 16 nm
- Around 67% lower typical power consumption: 60 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 6008 MHz
- 32.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 103
- 32.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 103
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 vs 21 February 2018 |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz vs 1227 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz vs 1647 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s vs 137.4 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 16 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 6008 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 103 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 103 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P4200 Mobile
- Around 75% higher pipelines: 1792 vs 1024
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 48% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10687 vs 7235
- Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 481 vs 430
- Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16345 vs 9313
- Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16345 vs 9313
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 1792 vs 1024 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10687 vs 7235 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 481 vs 430 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39050 vs 38863 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16345 vs 9313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16345 vs 9313 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3698 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P4200 Mobile
| 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 Quadro P4200 Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7235 | 10687 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 430 | 481 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 38863 | 39050 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9313 | 16345 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 103 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9313 | 16345 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 103 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3319 | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro P4200 Mobile | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Code name | TU117 | GP104 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 21 February 2018 |
| Place in performance rating | 362 | 296 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1785 MHz | 1647 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1575 MHz | 1227 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 | 1792 |
| Pixel fill rate | 57.12 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel/s | 137.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 7,200 million |
| Floating-point performance | 4,398 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
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 | 192.3 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 6008 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
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
