RTX A4500 Mobile vs Quadro K2000D

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000D with RTX A4500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

K2000D
2013, $599
2 GB GDDR5, 51 Watt
3.79

RTX A4500 Mobile outperforms K2000D by a whopping 936% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking750119
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.18no data
Power efficiency5.7621.73
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGK107GA104
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date1 March 2013 (12 years ago)22 March 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores3845888
Core clock speed954 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt140 Watt
Texture fill rate30.53276.0
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPS17.66 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs32184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46
L1 Cache32 KB5.8 MB
L2 Cache256 KB4 MB

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length202 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA3.08.6
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

K2000D 3.79
RTX A4500 Mobile 39.27
+936%

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.

K2000D 1599
Samples: 172
RTX A4500 Mobile 16573
+936%
Samples: 349

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

Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.79 39.27
Recency 1 March 2013 22 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 140 Watt

K2000D has 174.5% lower power consumption.

RTX A4500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 936.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A4500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000D in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000D is a workstation graphics card while RTX A4500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 K2000D
Quadro K2000D
NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile
RTX A4500 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.


3.8 17 votes

Rate Quadro K2000D on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 44 votes

Rate RTX A4500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2000D or RTX A4500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.