Quadro K2000D vs GeForce GTX 760

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 760 with Quadro K2000D, including specs and performance data.

GTX 760
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
12.44
+202%

GTX 760 outperforms K2000D by a whopping 202% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking399691
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.510.42
Power efficiency5.025.54
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK104GK107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date25 June 2013 (11 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 760 has 974% better value for money than K2000D.

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 cores1152384
Core clock speed980 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt51 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature97 °Cno data
Texture fill rate99.0730.53
Floating-point processing power2.378 TFLOPS0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs9632

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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length241 mm202 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Minimum recommended system power500 Wattno data
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 amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
PhysX+-
3D Vision Live+-

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
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
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 760 12.44
+202%
K2000D 4.12

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 760 4794
+202%
K2000D 1586

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 760 14286
+260%
K2000D 3973

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 760 44
+267%
K2000D 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:

Full HD68
+224%
21−24
−224%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.6628.52

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+240%
10−11
−240%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+204%
27−30
−204%
Hitman 3 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+210%
21−24
−210%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+242%
12−14
−242%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+240%
10−11
−240%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+240%
10−11
−240%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+204%
27−30
−204%
Hitman 3 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+210%
21−24
−210%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+242%
12−14
−242%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+240%
10−11
−240%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+204%
27−30
−204%
Hitman 3 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+210%
21−24
−210%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+233%
12−14
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+210%
10−11
−210%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+240%
10−11
−240%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+239%
18−20
−239%
Hitman 3 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+213%
8−9
−213%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+225%
24−27
−225%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+233%
6−7
−233%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+228%
18−20
−228%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

This is how GTX 760 and K2000D compete in popular games:

  • GTX 760 is 224% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.44 4.12
Recency 25 June 2013 1 March 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 51 Watt

GTX 760 has a 201.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 months.

K2000D, on the other hand, has 233.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 760 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000D in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 760 is a desktop card while Quadro K2000D 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 760
GeForce GTX 760
NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
Quadro K2000D

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.


3.9 2113 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 14 votes

Rate Quadro K2000D 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.