Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon RX Vega 3

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 3 with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 3
2019
15 Watt
2.74

T2000 Mobile outperforms RX Vega 3 by a whopping 595% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking868334
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.2524.77
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code namePicassoTU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date20 November 2019 (6 years ago)27 May 2019 (7 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1921024
Core clock speed300 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate13.20114.2
Floating-point processing power0.4224 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1264
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cacheno data1024 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsMotherboard DependentNo outputs

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RX Vega 3 2.74
T2000 Mobile 19.05
+595%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RX Vega 3 1149
Samples: 3104
T2000 Mobile 7985
+595%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX Vega 3 1724
T2000 Mobile 13524
+685%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD1280−85
+567%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 29 100−110
+276%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 40−45
+600%
Hogwarts Legacy 8 35−40
+375%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7 40−45
+529%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 7 80−85
+1057%
Counter-Strike 2 22 100−110
+395%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 40−45
+600%
Far Cry 5 5 60−65
+1180%
Fortnite 14 100−110
+629%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 75−80
+464%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 35−40
+443%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14 70−75
+469%
Valorant 45−50 140−150
+213%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 9−10 80−85
+800%
Counter-Strike 2 5 100−110
+2080%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 23 230−240
+913%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 40−45
+600%
Dota 2 21 110−120
+424%
Far Cry 5 7−8 60−65
+814%
Fortnite 14−16 100−110
+580%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 75−80
+464%
Grand Theft Auto V 9 70−75
+700%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 35−40
+443%
Metro Exodus 2 40−45
+2000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14 70−75
+469%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6 55−60
+817%
Valorant 45−50 140−150
+213%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10 80−85
+800%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 40−45
+600%
Dota 2 19 110−120
+479%
Far Cry 5 7−8 60−65
+814%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 75−80
+464%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 35−40
+443%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14 70−75
+469%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4 55−60
+1275%
Valorant 45−50 140−150
+213%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14−16 100−110
+580%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7 40−45
+567%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22 140−150
+605%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 30−35
+3200%
Metro Exodus 0−1 24−27
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 170−180
+584%
Valorant 24−27 160−170
+542%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 18−20
+800%
Far Cry 5 4−5 40−45
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 45−50
+717%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3 21−24
+950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 27−30
+625%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6 45−50
+800%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 35−40
+133%
Valorant 12−14 100−110
+692%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 8−9
Dota 2 8−9 65−70
+738%
Far Cry 5 1−2 21−24
+2100%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 30−35
+1600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4 20−22
+567%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4 20−22
+567%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60 55−60

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20 18−20
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 12−14
Metro Exodus 16−18 16−18
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 27−30

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−33 30−33
Counter-Strike 2 18−20 18−20
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 12−14

This is how RX Vega 3 and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 567% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 3200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile performs better in 55 tests (87%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (13%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.74 19.05
Recency 20 November 2019 27 May 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 60 Watt

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 5 months, and 75% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 595% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 3 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 3 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 2296 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 514 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 3 or Quadro T2000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.