Quadro K2000 vs GeForce GTX 470

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 470 with Quadro K2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 470
2010
1280 MB GDDR5, 215 Watt
8.07
+96.8%

GTX 470 outperforms K2000 by an impressive 97% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking517692
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.350.41
Power efficiency2.575.51
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF100GK107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date26 March 2010 (14 years ago)1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$349 $599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 470 has 229% better value for money than Quadro K2000.

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 cores448384
Core clock speed607 MHz954 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)215 Watt51 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate34.0530.53
Floating-point processing power1.089 TFLOPS0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs4016
TMUs5632

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).

Bus support16x PCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm202 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1280 MB2 GB
Memory bus width320 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1674 MHz (3348 data rate)1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth133.9 GB/s64 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIMini HDMI1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A+
CUDA+3.0

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 470 8.07
+96.8%
Quadro K2000 4.10

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.

GTX 470 3110
+96.7%
Quadro K2000 1581

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 470 10940
+177%
Quadro K2000 3952

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GTX 470 44
+267%
Quadro K2000 12

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:

900p55
+104%
27−30
−104%
Full HD64
+113%
30−35
−113%
1200p53
+121%
24−27
−121%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.4519.97

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+100%
27−30
−100%
Hitman 3 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+100%
27−30
−100%
Hitman 3 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+100%
27−30
−100%
Hitman 3 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+119%
21−24
−119%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+125%
12−14
−125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+111%
27−30
−111%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+120%
10−11
−120%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Hitman 3 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+113%
24−27
−113%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Hitman 3 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+107%
14−16
−107%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

This is how GTX 470 and Quadro K2000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 470 is 104% faster in 900p
  • GTX 470 is 113% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 470 is 121% faster in 1200p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.07 4.10
Recency 26 March 2010 1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1280 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 215 Watt 51 Watt

GTX 470 has a 96.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Quadro K2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 321.6% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 470 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 470 is a desktop card while Quadro K2000 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470
GeForce GTX 470
NVIDIA Quadro K2000
Quadro K2000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 317 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 470 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 215 votes

Rate Quadro K2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.