UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) vs Quadro K2000D

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
K1 K100 K120Q K160Q K180Q K340 NVS 510 Quadro 410 Quadro K420 Quadro K600 Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000D
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G1 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G4 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 750 32EUs Xe G1 Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000D with UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H), including specs and performance data.

K2000D
2013, $599
2 GB GDDR5, 51 Watt
3.83

Graphics 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) outperforms K2000D by a moderate 13% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
K2000D K2000D
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking750710
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.18no data
Power efficiency5.77no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Gen. 12 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameGK107Tiger Lake Xe
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date1 March 2013 (12 years ago)11 May 2021 (4 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 cores38432
Core clock speed954 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1450 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)51 Wattno data
Texture fill rate30.53no data
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data
L1 Cache32 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth64 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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-DisplayPortno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA3.0-

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
−21.4%
17
+21.4%
1440p24−27
−25%
30
+25%
4K10−12
−20%
12
+20%

Cost per frame, $

1080p42.79no data
1440p24.96no data
4K59.90no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 53
+0%
53
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 15
+0%
15
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+0%
11
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 15
+0%
15
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how K2000D and UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 21% faster in 1080p
  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 25% faster in 1440p
  • UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 20% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.83 4.34
Recency 1 March 2013 11 May 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm

UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) has a 13.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000D in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000D is a workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is a notebook 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
Intel UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

K2000D Quadro K2000D
vs
Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
vs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
K2000D Quadro K2000D
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
Quadro K2000 K2000
vs
RX 6550M RX 6550M
K2000D K2000D
vs
8400 GS 8400 GS
K2000D K2000D
vs
Plex 1000 Model IV Plex 1000 Model IV
K2000D K2000D
vs
Xbox XGPU-S Xbox XGPU S
K2000D K2000D
vs
A100 PCIe A100 PCIe
K2000D K2000D
vs
RTX 4050 Mobile RTX 4050 Mobile
K2000D K2000D
vs
RTX 4070 Ti SUPER RTX 4070 Ti SUPER
K2000D K2000D
vs
RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB
Quadro K4000 K4000
vs
GT 650M GT 650M
Quadro K4000 K4000
vs
HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)

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
3.1 30 votes

Rate UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2000D or UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.