Quadro T2000 Mobile vs HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
T2000 Mobile outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 5909% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1304 | 272 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 23.83 |
| Architecture | Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Sandy Bridge | TU117 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 1 May 2011 (13 years ago) | 27 May 2019 (5 years ago) |
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 | 6 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 1575 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1785 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 60 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 114.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 3.656 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
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 | no data | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 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 | no data | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
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 | 8
−5525%
| 450−500
+5525%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−517%
|
35−40
+517%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1300%
|
40−45
+1300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−517%
|
35−40
+517%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1300%
|
40−45
+1300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1367%
|
85−90
+1367%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−1075%
|
45−50
+1075%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−517%
|
35−40
+517%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1300%
|
40−45
+1300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−871%
|
65−70
+871%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1367%
|
85−90
+1367%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1871%
|
130−140
+1871%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−1075%
|
45−50
+1075%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−1220%
|
65−70
+1220%
|
| World of Tanks | 10
−2260%
|
230−240
+2260%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−517%
|
35−40
+517%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1300%
|
40−45
+1300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−871%
|
65−70
+871%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1367%
|
85−90
+1367%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1871%
|
130−140
+1871%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−5850%
|
110−120
+5850%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−467%
|
16−18
+467%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1325%
|
55−60
+1325%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−625%
|
27−30
+625%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−1250%
|
50−55
+1250%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−6100%
|
60−65
+6100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 21−24 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 24−27 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:
- T2000 Mobile is 5525% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 6100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- T2000 Mobile is ahead in 30 tests (49%)
- there's a draw in 31 test (51%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 19.83 |
| Recency | 1 May 2011 | 27 May 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 12 nm |
T2000 Mobile has a 5909.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 166.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
