Quadro P3200 vs Quadro K2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000 with Quadro P3200, including specs and performance data.

Quadro K2000
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 51 Watt
4.10

P3200 outperforms K2000 by a whopping 455% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking692249
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.41no data
Power efficiency5.5120.77
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK107GP104
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)21 February 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

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 cores3841792
Core clock speed954 MHz1328 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1543 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate30.53172.8
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPS5.53 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs32112

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length202 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1753 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s168.3 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 Connectors1x DVI, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA3.06.1

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 K2000 4.10
Quadro P3200 22.74
+455%

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 K2000 1581
Quadro P3200 8762
+454%

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 K2000 3952
Quadro P3200 34300
+768%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro K2000 4116
Quadro P3200 35810
+770%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro K2000 3055
Quadro P3200 27741
+808%

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 HD14−16
−514%
86
+514%
4K5−6
−460%
28
+460%

Cost per frame, $

1080p42.79no data
4K119.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65
+0%
65
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 129
+0%
129
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 88
+0%
88
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40
+0%
40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 72
+0%
72
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

This is how Quadro K2000 and Quadro P3200 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P3200 is 514% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P3200 is 460% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.10 22.74
Recency 1 March 2013 21 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro K2000 has 47.1% lower power consumption.

Quadro P3200, on the other hand, has a 454.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P3200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000 is a workstation card while Quadro P3200 is a mobile 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 K2000
Quadro K2000
NVIDIA Quadro P3200
Quadro P3200

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.


3.6 215 votes

Rate Quadro K2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 296 votes

Rate Quadro P3200 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.