Quadro K2000 vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Place in the ranking	521	694
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.82	0.43
Power efficiency	3.23	5.56
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GF114	GK107
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	25 January 2011 (13 years ago)	1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$249	$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 560 Ti has 323% 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 cores	384	384
Core clock speed	823 MHz	954 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	51 Watt
Texture fill rate	52.67	30.53
Floating-point processing power	1.263 TFLOPS	0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	64	32

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	229 mm	202 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None

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	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1002 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	128.3 GB/s	64 GB/s

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	2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI	1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	+
CUDA	2.1	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 560 Ti 7.96
+93.7%

Quadro K2000 4.11

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 560 Ti 3059
+93.5%

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 560 Ti 10723
+171%

Quadro K2000 3950

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 560 Ti 38
+217%

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:

900p	63 +110%	30−35 −110%
Full HD	63 +110%	30−35 −110%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.95
+405%

19.97

−405%

GTX 560 Ti has 405% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Elden Ring	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +117%	12−14 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +100%	16−18 −100%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +110%	10−11 −110%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%
Valorant	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +117%	12−14 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Dota 2	27−30 +100%	14−16 −100%
Elden Ring	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +113%	16−18 −113%
Fortnite	45−50 +95.8%	24−27 −95.8%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +100%	16−18 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 +100%	14−16 −100%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +110%	10−11 −110%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +113%	30−33 −113%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +120%	10−11 −120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +100%	12−14 −100%
Valorant	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%
World of Tanks	120−130 +100%	60−65 −100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +117%	12−14 −117%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Dota 2	27−30 +100%	14−16 −100%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +113%	16−18 −113%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +100%	16−18 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 +113%	30−33 −113%
Valorant	27−30 +125%	12−14 −125%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Elden Ring	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +122%	18−20 −122%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
World of Tanks	55−60 +115%	27−30 −115%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +113%	8−9 −113%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +100%	8−9 −100%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Valorant	20−22 +100%	10−11 −100%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Elden Ring	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +100%	9−10 −100%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +130%	10−11 −130%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +100%	9−10 −100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Counter-Strike 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Dota 2	18−20 +111%	9−10 −111%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Fortnite	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Valorant	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%

This is how GTX 560 Ti and Quadro K2000 compete in popular games:

GTX 560 Ti is 110% faster in 900p
GTX 560 Ti is 110% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.96	4.11
Recency	25 January 2011	1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	51 Watt

GTX 560 Ti has a 93.7% higher aggregate performance score.

Quadro K2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 560 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 560 Ti 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.