Quadro K420 vs Quadro 2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 2000 and Quadro K420, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro 2000
2010
1 GB GDDR5, 62 Watt
2.45
+27.6%

2000 outperforms K420 by a significant 28% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking837906
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.140.08
Power efficiency2.713.21
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF106GK107
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date24 December 2010 (13 years ago)22 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 $96.67

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 2000 has 75% better value for money than Quadro K420.

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 cores192192
Core clock speed625 MHz876 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)62 Watt41 Watt
Texture fill rate20.0014.02
Floating-point processing power0.48 TFLOPS0.3364 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3216

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length178 mm160 mm
Width1-slot1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB/2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed650 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidth41.6 GB/sUp to 29 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA2.13.0

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.

Quadro 2000 2.45
+27.6%
Quadro K420 1.92

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 2000 946
+27.7%
Quadro K420 741

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 2000 3884
+110%
Quadro K420 1847

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.45 1.92
Recency 24 December 2010 22 July 2014
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 62 Watt 41 Watt

Quadro 2000 has a 27.6% higher aggregate performance score.

Quadro K420, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 51.2% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K420 in performance tests.


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 Quadro 2000
Quadro 2000
NVIDIA Quadro K420
Quadro K420

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.


3.4 313 votes

Rate Quadro 2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 143 votes

Rate Quadro K420 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.