Quadro M2000 vs Arc Graphics 140V

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc Graphics 140V with Quadro M2000, including specs and performance data.

Arc Graphics 140V
2024
16 GB LPDDR5x
11.76
+29.4%

Arc Graphics 140V outperforms M2000 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking424481
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.51
Power efficiencyno data9.75
ArchitectureXe² (2024)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameLunar Lake iGPUGM206
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)8 April 2016 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$437.75

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores8768
Core clock speedno data796 MHz
Boost clock speed2050 MHz1163 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,940 million
Manufacturing process technology3 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data55.82
Floating-point processing powerno data1.786 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data48
L1 Cacheno data288 KB
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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data201 mm
Widthno data1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeLPDDR5x128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1653 MHz
Memory bandwidthno dataUp to 106 GB/s
Shared memory+no data
Resizable BAR+-

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 Connectorsno data4x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_212
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-5.2

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.

Arc Graphics 140V 11.76
+29.4%
Quadro M2000 9.09

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.

Arc Graphics 140V Samples: 1588 5202
+29.4%
Quadro M2000 Samples: 1109 4021

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 HD40
+33.3%
30−35
−33.3%
1440p29
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
4K24
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data14.59
1440pno data20.85
4Kno data24.32

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 87
+33.8%
65−70
−33.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Hogwarts Legacy 41
+36.7%
30−33
−36.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Counter-Strike 2 85
+30.8%
65−70
−30.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Far Cry 5 52
+30%
40−45
−30%
Fortnite 70−75
+32.7%
55−60
−32.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+32.5%
40−45
−32.5%
Forza Horizon 5 70
+40%
50−55
−40%
Hogwarts Legacy 35
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+31.4%
35−40
−31.4%
Valorant 110−120
+29.4%
85−90
−29.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Counter-Strike 2 42
+40%
30−33
−40%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+36.9%
130−140
−36.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Far Cry 5 47
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%
Fortnite 70−75
+32.7%
55−60
−32.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+32.5%
40−45
−32.5%
Forza Horizon 5 59
+31.1%
45−50
−31.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 23
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+31.4%
35−40
−31.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+37.8%
45−50
−37.8%
Valorant 137
+37%
100−105
−37%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Far Cry 5 44
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+32.5%
40−45
−32.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 19
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+31.4%
35−40
−31.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Valorant 110−120
+29.4%
85−90
−29.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+32.7%
55−60
−32.7%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+35.7%
70−75
−35.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 18
+50%
12−14
−50%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+35%
80−85
−35%
Valorant 114
+34.1%
85−90
−34.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 37
+37%
27−30
−37%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Valorant 65−70
+36%
50−55
−36%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

This is how Arc Graphics 140V and Quadro M2000 compete in popular games:

  • Arc Graphics 140V is 33% faster in 1080p
  • Arc Graphics 140V is 38% faster in 1440p
  • Arc Graphics 140V is 33% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.76 9.09
Recency 24 September 2024 8 April 2016
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 3 nm 28 nm

Arc Graphics 140V has a 29.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc Graphics 140V is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc Graphics 140V is a notebook graphics card while Quadro M2000 is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel Arc Graphics 140V
Arc Graphics 140V
NVIDIA Quadro M2000
Quadro M2000

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.


3.7 54 votes

Rate Arc Graphics 140V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 227 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc Graphics 140V or Quadro M2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.