RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Quadro 3000M X2

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated73
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data83.51
Power efficiencyno data45.48
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameEXMF104AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years ago)12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores2402816
Core clock speed450 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2130 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate18.00187.4
Floating-point processing power0.432 TFLOPS12 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs4088
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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).

InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed625 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s256.0 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.18.9

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 February 2011 12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has an age advantage of 12 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro 3000M X2 and RTX 2000 Ada Generation. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro 3000M X2 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.

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 3000M X2
Quadro 3000M X2
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro 3000M X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 27 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation 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.