Quadro P2000 vs GeForce GTX TITAN X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX TITAN X with Quadro P2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX TITAN X
2015
12 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
33.71
+78.3%

GTX TITAN X outperforms P2000 by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking159298
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.259.77
Power efficiency9.3017.39
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGM200GP106
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date17 March 2015 (9 years ago)6 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $585

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P2000 has 18% better value for money than GTX TITAN X.

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 cores30721024
Core clock speed1000 MHz1076 MHz
Boost clock speed1075 MHz1480 MHz
Number of transistors8,000 million4,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate209.194.72
Floating-point processing power6.691 TFLOPS3.031 TFLOPS
ROPs9640
TMUs19264

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 3.0 x16
Length267 mm201 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone
SLI options4x-

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 amount12 GB5 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth336.5 GB/s140.2 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.24x 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.

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA5.26.1

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 TITAN X 33.71
+78.3%
Quadro P2000 18.91

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 TITAN X 12955
+78.2%
Quadro P2000 7268

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 TITAN X 41155
+79.8%
Quadro P2000 22895

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX TITAN X 53345
+127%
Quadro P2000 23532

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX TITAN X 33524
+54.7%
Quadro P2000 21668

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 HD100−110
+72.4%
58
−72.4%
1440p35−40
+75%
20
−75%
4K30−35
+76.5%
17
−76.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.99
+1%
10.09
−1%
1440p28.54
+2.5%
29.25
−2.5%
4K33.30
+3.3%
34.41
−3.3%
  • GTX TITAN X and Quadro P2000 have nearly equal cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX TITAN X and Quadro P2000 have nearly equal cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX TITAN X and Quadro P2000 have nearly equal cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Far Cry 5 72
+0%
72
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 137
+0%
137
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
World of Tanks 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 98
+0%
98
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40
+0%
40
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
World of Tanks 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 39
+0%
39
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how GTX TITAN X and Quadro P2000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX TITAN X is 72% faster in 1080p
  • GTX TITAN X is 75% faster in 1440p
  • GTX TITAN X is 76% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.71 18.91
Recency 17 March 2015 6 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 5 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 75 Watt

GTX TITAN X has a 78.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 140% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro P2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX TITAN X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX TITAN X is a desktop card while Quadro P2000 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 TITAN X
GeForce GTX TITAN X
NVIDIA Quadro P2000
Quadro P2000

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 235 votes

Rate GeForce GTX TITAN X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 661 vote

Rate Quadro P2000 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.