Quadro FX 2000 vs Quadro 5010M

Place in the ranking	676	1482
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.03	no data
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code name	GF110	NV30
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	22 February 2011 (13 years ago)	21 January 2003 (22 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	384	no data
Core clock speed	450 MHz	400 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	125 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	21.60	3.200
Floating-point processing power	0.6912 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	4
TMUs	48	8

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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	AGP 8x
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x Molex

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	GDDR5	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	128 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	650 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	83.2 GB/s	12.8 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	9.0a
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	1.5 (2.1)
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	2.0	-

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 5010M 4.34
+8580%

FX 2000 0.05

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 5010M 1691
+9294%

FX 2000 18

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:

900p	38	-0−1
Full HD	59	0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	8−9	0−1
Metro Exodus	10−11	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
Valorant	10−12	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11	0−1
Dota 2	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	21−24	0−1
Fortnite	24−27	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	8−9	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16	0−1
Metro Exodus	10−11	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16	0−1
Valorant	10−12	0−1
World of Tanks	70−75	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11	0−1
Dota 2	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	21−24	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	8−9	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40	0−1
Valorant	10−12	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	4−5	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4	0−1
World of Tanks	30−35	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−11	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	6−7	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8	0−1
Valorant	12−14	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7	0−1
Dota 2	16−18	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	16−18	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Fortnite	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	2−3	0−1
Valorant	4−5	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.34	0.05
Recency	22 February 2011	21 January 2003
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	128 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	130 nm

Quadro 5010M has a 8580% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 225% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro 5010M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 5010M is a mobile workstation card while Quadro FX 2000 is a workstation one.

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