Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile

Place in the ranking	140	269
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	43.01	no data
Power efficiency	16.36	23.83
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 35.64
+71.6%

T2000 Mobile 20.77

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	114 +75.4%	65−70 −75.4%
1440p	70 +75%	40−45 −75%
4K	56 +86.7%	30−35 −86.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.39	no data
1440p	7.14	no data
4K	8.93	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +97.3%	35−40 −97.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	75−80 +82.9%	40−45 −82.9%
Elden Ring	120−130 +86.4%	65−70 −86.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	57 −15.8%	65−70 +15.8%
Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +97.3%	35−40 −97.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 −28.1%	40−45 +28.1%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +92%	85−90 −92%
Metro Exodus	89 +58.9%	55−60 −58.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	92 +95.7%	45−50 −95.7%
Valorant	156 +85.7%	80−85 −85.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	103 +56.1%	65−70 −56.1%
Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +97.3%	35−40 −97.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	27 −51.9%	40−45 +51.9%
Dota 2	79 +8.2%	70−75 −8.2%
Elden Ring	120−130 +86.4%	65−70 −86.4%
Far Cry 5	67 −1.5%	65−70 +1.5%
Fortnite	160 +46.8%	100−110 −46.8%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +92%	85−90 −92%
Grand Theft Auto V	119 +63%	70−75 −63%
Metro Exodus	71 +26.8%	55−60 −26.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	118 −16.9%	130−140 +16.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	51 +8.5%	45−50 −8.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	131 +98.5%	65−70 −98.5%
Valorant	94 +11.9%	80−85 −11.9%
World of Tanks	270−280 +18.2%	230−240 −18.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	53 −24.5%	65−70 +24.5%
Counter-Strike 2	70−75 +97.3%	35−40 −97.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	23 −78.3%	40−45 +78.3%
Dota 2	120 +64.4%	70−75 −64.4%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +36.8%	65−70 −36.8%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +92%	85−90 −92%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	101 −36.6%	130−140 +36.6%
Valorant	137 +63.1%	80−85 −63.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	65−70 +97%	30−35 −97%
Elden Ring	70−75 +100%	35−40 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	65−70 +91.2%	30−35 −91.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +1.7%	170−180 −1.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	32 +68.4%	18−20 −68.4%
World of Tanks	220−230 +62.1%	140−150 −62.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	53 +26.2%	40−45 −26.2%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +100%	16−18 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +100%	55−60 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +87%	50−55 −87%
Metro Exodus	74 +57.4%	45−50 −57.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 +107%	27−30 −107%
Valorant	94 +74.1%	50−55 −74.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +112%	16−18 −112%
Dota 2	76 +117%	35−40 −117%
Elden Ring	30−35 +120%	14−16 −120%
Grand Theft Auto V	76 +117%	35−40 −117%
Metro Exodus	27 +80%	14−16 −80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110 +77.4%	60−65 −77.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	76 +117%	35−40 −117%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	42 +100%	21−24 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +112%	16−18 −112%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	65−70 +94.3%	35−40 −94.3%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +88.9%	27−30 −88.9%
Fortnite	51 +104%	24−27 −104%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +87.1%	30−35 −87.1%
Valorant	50 +100%	24−27 −100%

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

GTX 1080 Mobile is 75% faster in 1080p
GTX 1080 Mobile is 75% faster in 1440p
GTX 1080 Mobile is 87% faster in 4K

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

in Elden Ring, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1080 Mobile is 120% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 78% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1080 Mobile is ahead in 53 tests (84%)
T2000 Mobile is ahead in 9 tests (14%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	35.64	20.77
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