NVIDIA RTX A2000 vs NVIDIA Quadro P1000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA RTX A2000 and NVIDIA Quadro P1000 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 - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA RTX A2000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- 2108.1x more texture fill rate: 124.8 GTexel/s vs 59.2 GTexel / s
- 6.5x more pipelines: 3328 vs 512
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 8 nm vs 14 nm
- Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 65% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 971 vs 590
- 3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 13585 vs 4500
- 4.7x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 73337 vs 15667
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 10 Aug 2021 vs 7 February 2017 |
| Texture fill rate | 124.8 GTexel/s vs 59.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 3328 vs 512 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm vs 14 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 6 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 971 vs 590 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 13585 vs 4500 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 73337 vs 15667 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P1000
- 2.3x more core clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 562 MHz
- Around 23% higher boost clock speed: 1480 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- Around 49% lower typical power consumption: 47 Watt vs 70 Watt
- 3.3x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective)
- Around 18% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1591 vs 1345
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1266 MHz vs 562 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt vs 70 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1591 vs 1345 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA RTX A2000 | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 971 | 590 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 13585 | 4500 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 73337 | 15667 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1345 | 1591 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA RTX A2000 | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Ampere | Pascal |
| Code name | GA106 | GP107 |
| Launch date | 10 Aug 2021 | 7 February 2017 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $449 | $375 |
| Place in performance rating | 128 | 517 |
| Price now | $319.99 | |
| Type | Workstation | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 15.53 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1480 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 562 MHz | 1266 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 124.8 GFLOPS (1:64) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 7.987 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 3328 | 512 |
| Pixel fill rate | 57.60 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 124.8 GTexel/s | 59.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 70 Watt | 47 Watt |
| Transistor count | 13250 million | 3,300 million |
| Floating-point performance | 1,894 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Form factor | Dual-slot | |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 167 mm (6.6 inches) | 145 mm |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 250 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Width | 69 mm (2.7 inches) | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 80.19 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 5012 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA RTX A2000 with others
NVIDIARTX A2000 vs
NVIDIATesla V100 SXM2 16 GB
NVIDIARTX A2000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2070 Super
NVIDIARTX A2000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2080 Super Max-Q
NVIDIARTX A2000 vs
AMDRadeon RX 5600
NVIDIARTX A2000 vs
NVIDIARTX A4000 Mobile
NVIDIARTX A2000 vs
AMDRadeon RX 6700M
