GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile vs Quadro M2000

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000 with GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2000
2016, $438
4 GB 128-bit, 75 Watt
9.58

RTX 2060 Mobile outperforms M2000 by a whopping 186% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking491236
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.58no data
Power efficiency9.8518.37
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM206TU106
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 April 2016 (9 years ago)29 January 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$437.75 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 cores7681920
Core clock speed796 MHz960 MHz
Boost clock speed1163 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate55.82144.0
Floating-point processing power1.786 TFLOPS4.608 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs48120
Tensor Coresno data240
Ray Tracing Coresno data30
L1 Cache288 KB1.9 MB
L2 Cache1024 KB3 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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length201 mmno data
Width1" (2.5 cm)no 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 type128 BitGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/s336.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
VR Readyno data+
nView Desktop Management+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.27.5
DLSS-+

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 HD35−40
−197%
104
+197%
1440p21−24
−214%
66
+214%
4K14−16
−193%
41
+193%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.51no data
1440p20.85no data
4K31.27no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 121
+0%
121
+0%
Far Cry 5 96
+0%
96
+0%
Fortnite 162
+0%
162
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 108
+0%
108
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 171
+0%
171
+0%
Valorant 223
+0%
223
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Dota 2 118
+0%
118
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 117
+0%
117
+0%
Far Cry 5 91
+0%
91
+0%
Fortnite 144
+0%
144
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 107
+0%
107
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90
+0%
90
+0%
Metro Exodus 56
+0%
56
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 147
+0%
147
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 111
+0%
111
+0%
Valorant 196
+0%
196
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 101
+0%
101
+0%
Far Cry 5 84
+0%
84
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 88
+0%
88
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 112
+0%
112
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%
Valorant 123
+0%
123
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 113
+0%
113
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 212
+0%
212
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75
+0%
75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 74
+0%
74
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+0%
39
+0%
Valorant 171
+0%
171
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 42
+0%
42
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 87
+0%
87
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 38
+0%
38
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 34
+0%
34
+0%

This is how Quadro M2000 and RTX 2060 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2060 Mobile is 197% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2060 Mobile is 214% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2060 Mobile is 193% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.58 27.40
Recency 8 April 2016 29 January 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 115 Watt

Quadro M2000 has 53.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 2060 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 186% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 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 M2000
Quadro M2000
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2060 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.


3.8 229 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1924 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2000 or GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.