Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Quadro FX Go1400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX Go1400 and Quadro T2000 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX Go1400
2005
256 MB DDR
0.24

T2000 Mobile outperforms FX Go1400 by a whopping 7863% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1404305
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data23.88
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNV41TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date25 February 2005 (20 years ago)27 May 2019 (6 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 coresno data1024
Core clock speed275 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors222 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data60 Watt
Texture fill rate2.200114.2
Floating-point processing powerno data3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs864

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceMXM-IIIPCIe 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 typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed295 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth18.88 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

FX Go1400 0.24
T2000 Mobile 19.11
+7863%

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.

FX Go1400 101
T2000 Mobile 7985
+7806%

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
HELLDIVERS 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.24 19.11
Recency 25 February 2005 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 12 nm

T2000 Mobile has a 7862.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX Go1400 in performance tests.

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 FX Go1400
Quadro FX Go1400
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

Other comparisons

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 FX Go1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 470 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX Go1400 or Quadro T2000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.