GeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2 vs Quadro M1000M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro M1000M with GeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2, including specs and performance data.
M1000M outperforms 570 Rev. 2 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 595 | 609 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.62 | 0.87 |
| Power efficiency | 13.01 | 2.30 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | GM107 | GF110 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 August 2015 (10 years ago) | 7 December 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $200.89 | $349 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
M1000M has 86% better value for money than GTX 570 Rev. 2.
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 cores | 512 | 480 |
| Core clock speed | 993 MHz | 732 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1072 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,870 million | 3,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 219 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 31.78 | 43.92 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.017 TFLOPS | 1.405 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 40 |
| TMUs | 32 | 60 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 960 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 640 KB |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB/4 GB | 1280 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 320 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1253 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB/s | 152.0 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Display Port | 1.2 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | - |
| 3D Vision Pro | + | no data |
| Mosaic | + | no data |
| nView Display Management | + | no data |
| Optimus | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
| CUDA | 5.0 | 2.0 |
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 HD | 39
+11.4%
| 35−40
−11.4%
|
| 4K | 13
+8.3%
| 12−14
−8.3%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 5.15
+93.6%
| 9.97
−93.6%
|
| 4K | 15.45
+88.2%
| 29.08
−88.2%
|
- M1000M has 94% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- M1000M has 88% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+5%
|
40−45
−5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+14.8%
|
27−30
−14.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+7.1%
|
70−75
−7.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 110−120
+11%
|
100−105
−11%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
+8%
|
50−55
−8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Fortnite | 40−45
+5%
|
40−45
−5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+14.8%
|
27−30
−14.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+7.1%
|
70−75
−7.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
+8%
|
50−55
−8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+14.8%
|
27−30
−14.8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 11
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+7.1%
|
70−75
−7.1%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 40−45
+5%
|
40−45
−5%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 50−55
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+11.4%
|
35−40
−11.4%
|
| Valorant | 75−80
+10%
|
70−75
−10%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
This is how M1000M and GTX 570 Rev. 2 compete in popular games:
- M1000M is 11% faster in 1080p
- M1000M is 8% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.43 | 6.21 |
| Recency | 18 August 2015 | 7 December 2010 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB/4 GB | 1280 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 219 Watt |
M1000M has a 3.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 447.5% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M1000M and GeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2.
Be aware that Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
