GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB vs Quadro K2000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000M with GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, including specs and performance data.

K2000M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 55 Watt
2.36

GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB outperforms K2000M by a whopping 378% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking866438
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency3.2711.48
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGK107GP107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2012 (13 years ago)1 February 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$265.27 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores384768
Core clock speed745 MHz1366 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1442 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate23.8469.22
Floating-point processing power0.5722 TFLOPS2.215 TFLOPS
ROPs1624
TMUs3248

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB3 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1752 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s84.1 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API and SDK 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
CUDA+6.1

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 HD25
−340%
110−120
+340%

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.61no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Fortnite 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
Valorant 40−45
−376%
200−210
+376%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 63
−376%
300−310
+376%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Dota 2 24−27
−340%
110−120
+340%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Fortnite 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Valorant 40−45
−376%
200−210
+376%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Dota 2 24−27
−340%
110−120
+340%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Valorant 40−45
−376%
200−210
+376%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−371%
80−85
+371%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−378%
110−120
+378%
Valorant 21−24
−376%
100−105
+376%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Sons of the Forest 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−369%
75−80
+369%
Valorant 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Sons of the Forest 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%

This is how K2000M and GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB is 340% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.36 11.29
Recency 1 June 2012 1 February 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 75 Watt

K2000M has 36.4% lower power consumption.

GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, on the other hand, has a 378.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K2000M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB 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 K2000M
Quadro K2000M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB

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.


3.7 35 votes

Rate Quadro K2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 60 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro K2000M or GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.