Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile

Place in the ranking	140	266
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	42.16	no data
Power efficiency	16.24	23.67
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GP104	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	15 August 2016 (8 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$499.99	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	2560	1024
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	1575 MHz
Boost clock speed	1771 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	60 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	94 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	283.4	114.2
Floating-point processing power	9.068 TFLOPS	3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	160	64

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 size	large	medium sized
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	10 GB/s	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	320 GB/s	128.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost	3.0	no data
VR Ready	+	no data
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1080 Mobile 35.54
+71.5%

T2000 Mobile 20.72

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.

GTX 1080 Mobile 28527
+111%

T2000 Mobile 13524

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 HD	115 +76.9%	65−70 −76.9%
1440p	71 +77.5%	40−45 −77.5%
4K	53 +76.7%	30−35 −76.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.35	no data
1440p	7.04	no data
4K	9.43	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

60−65
+84.8%

30−35

−84.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	59 +28.3%	45−50 −28.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	78 +123%	35−40 −123%
Battlefield 5	115 +69.1%	65−70 −69.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	93 +121%	40−45 −121%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +84.8%	30−35 −84.8%
Far Cry 5	97 +102%	45−50 −102%
Far Cry New Dawn	129 +135%	55−60 −135%
Forza Horizon 4	214 +68.5%	120−130 −68.5%
Hitman 3	91 +122%	40−45 −122%
Horizon Zero Dawn	188 +89.9%	95−100 −89.9%
Metro Exodus	140 +97.2%	70−75 −97.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 +67.3%	55−60 −67.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	129 +87%	65−70 −87%
Watch Dogs: Legion	150 +61.3%	90−95 −61.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	106 +130%	45−50 −130%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	68 +94.3%	35−40 −94.3%
Battlefield 5	107 +57.4%	65−70 −57.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	86 +105%	40−45 −105%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +84.8%	30−35 −84.8%
Far Cry 5	102 +113%	45−50 −113%
Far Cry New Dawn	100 +81.8%	55−60 −81.8%
Forza Horizon 4	195 +53.5%	120−130 −53.5%
Hitman 3	87 +112%	40−45 −112%
Horizon Zero Dawn	186 +87.9%	95−100 −87.9%
Metro Exodus	126 +77.5%	70−75 −77.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	82 +49.1%	55−60 −49.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	120−130 +85.5%	65−70 −85.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	145 +215%	45−50 −215%
Watch Dogs: Legion	149 +60.2%	90−95 −60.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	53 +15.2%	45−50 −15.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	59 +68.6%	35−40 −68.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	66 +57.1%	40−45 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +84.8%	30−35 −84.8%
Far Cry 5	77 +60.4%	45−50 −60.4%
Forza Horizon 4	102 −24.5%	120−130 +24.5%
Hitman 3	76 +85.4%	40−45 −85.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	123 +24.2%	95−100 −24.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	120−130 +85.5%	65−70 −85.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	74 +60.9%	45−50 −60.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	51 −82.4%	90−95 +82.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

83
+50.9%

55−60

−50.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80 +100%	40−45 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	69 +116%	30−35 −116%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	42 +100%	21−24 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	46 +142%	18−20 −142%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	49 +113%	21−24 −113%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%
Far Cry 5	47 +95.8%	24−27 −95.8%
Forza Horizon 4	193 +66.4%	110−120 −66.4%
Hitman 3	54 +125%	24−27 −125%
Horizon Zero Dawn	89 +112%	40−45 −112%
Metro Exodus	74 +89.7%	35−40 −89.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	85−90 +97.7%	40−45 −97.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +108%	24−27 −108%
Watch Dogs: Legion	144 +19%	120−130 −19%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

72
+112%

30−35

−112%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40 +100%	20−22 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	39 +144%	16−18 −144%
Hitman 3	34 +113%	16−18 −113%
Horizon Zero Dawn	89 −20.2%	100−110 +20.2%
Metro Exodus	45 +105%	21−24 −105%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 +143%	21−24 −143%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	31 +158%	12−14 −158%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27 +145%	10−12 −145%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27 +145%	10−12 −145%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry 5	26 +136%	10−12 −136%
Forza Horizon 4	61 +118%	27−30 −118%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +100%	24−27 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21 +133%	9−10 −133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

39
+117%

18−20

−117%

This is how GTX 1080 Mobile and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

GTX 1080 Mobile is 77% faster in 1080p
GTX 1080 Mobile is 78% faster in 1440p
GTX 1080 Mobile is 77% faster in 4K

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1080 Mobile is 215% faster.
in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 82% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1080 Mobile is ahead in 69 tests (96%)
T2000 Mobile is ahead in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	35.54	20.72
Recency	15 August 2016	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	60 Watt