RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Quadro 1000M

Place in the ranking	991	76
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.18	84.16
Power efficiency	2.25	44.60
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GF108	AD107
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	13 January 2011 (14 years ago)	12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$174.95	$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 46656% better value for money than Quadro 1000M.

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	96	2816
Core clock speed	700 MHz	1620 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2130 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	11.20	187.4
Floating-point processing power	0.2688 TFLOPS	12 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	48
TMUs	16	88
Tensor Cores	no data	88
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	22

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	medium sized	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	168 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	DDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	256.0 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 outputs

4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	2.1	8.9

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.

Quadro 1000M 1.47

RTX 2000 Ada Generation 45.35
+2985%

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.

Quadro 1000M 564

RTX 2000 Ada Generation 17435
+2991%

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.

Quadro 1000M 2131

RTX 2000 Ada Generation 86172
+3944%

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

−2923%

1300−1350
+2923%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

4.07

−715%

0.50
+715%

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 715% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Elden Ring	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −2900%	210−220 +2900%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Dota 2	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Elden Ring	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −2627%	300−310 +2627%
Fortnite	6−7 −2900%	180−190 +2900%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Grand Theft Auto V	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 −2713%	450−500 +2713%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −2900%	210−220 +2900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −2900%	210−220 +2900%
World of Tanks	30−35 −2965%	950−1000 +2965%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Dota 2	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −2627%	300−310 +2627%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 −2713%	450−500 +2713%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
World of Tanks	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −2900%	270−280 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2900%	60−65 +2900%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −2900%	150−160 +2900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −2900%	90−95 +2900%
Valorant	7−8 −2900%	210−220 +2900%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −2713%	450−500 +2713%
Elden Ring	0−1	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −2900%	450−500 +2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −2900%	120−130 +2900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −2900%	450−500 +2900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Dota 2	16−18 −2713%	450−500 +2713%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Valorant	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%

This is how Quadro 1000M and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 2923% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.47	45.35
Recency	13 January 2011	12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	70 Watt

Quadro 1000M has 55.6% lower power consumption.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 2985% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 1000M is a mobile workstation card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

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