Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q vs Quadro M2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro M2000 Quadro M3000 SE Quadro M4000 Quadro M5000 Quadro M5000 SE Quadro M6000 Quadro M6000 24 GB
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q Quadro RTX 5000 X2 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000 with Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2000
2016
4 GB 128-bit, 75 Watt
10.39

RTX 4000 Max-Q outperforms M2000 by a whopping 213% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro M2000 Quadro M2000
RTX 4000 Max-Q RTX 4000 Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking448178
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.11no data
Power efficiency9.5027.90
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM206TU104
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date8 April 2016 (8 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$437.75 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

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 cores7682560
Core clock speed796 MHz780 MHz
Boost clock speed1163 MHz1380 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million13,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate55.82220.8
Floating-point processing power1.786 TFLOPS7.066 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs48160
Tensor Coresno data320
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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 connectorsNoneNone

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 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz1625 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/s416.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 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 compatibility

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-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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.

Quadro M2000 10.39
RTX 4000 Max-Q 32.56
+213%

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.

Quadro M2000 3994
RTX 4000 Max-Q 12513
+213%

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 HD27−30
−222%
87
+222%
1440p14−16
−229%
46
+229%
4K14−16
−243%
48
+243%

Cost per frame, $

1080p16.21no data
1440p31.27no data
4K31.27no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Dota 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 115
+0%
115
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Dota 2 101
+0%
101
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63
+0%
63
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+0%
36
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 65
+0%
65
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how Quadro M2000 and RTX 4000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 Max-Q is 222% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 Max-Q is 229% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4000 Max-Q is 243% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 10.39 32.56
Recency 8 April 2016 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 80 Watt

Quadro M2000 has 6.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 4000 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 213.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000 is a workstation card while Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q 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 M2000
Quadro M2000
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro M2000 Quadro M2000
vs
Quadro K5000 Quadro K5000
RTX 4000 Max-Q Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q
vs
RTX A3000 Mobile RTX A3000 Mobile
Quadro M2000 Quadro M2000
vs
GRID M60-8Q GRID M60 8Q
GTX 850M NVIDIA GTX 850M
vs
6600 GT 6600 GT
K5000 SYNC NVIDIA K5000 SYNC
vs
MX150 GP107 GP107
GTX 550 Ti NVIDIA GTX 550 Ti
vs
ATI 9600 9600
K4100M Quadro K4100M
vs
T400 Mobile T400 Mobile
M2000M Quadro M2000M
vs
Radeon 540 540
6200 SE TurboCache GeForce 6200 SE TurboCache
vs
550X Mobile 550X Mobile
T400 T400
vs
RTX 4500 Ada Generation 4500 Ada Generation
7600 LE GeForce 7600 LE
vs
B200 SXM 192 GB 192 GB
GTX 750 NVIDIA GTX 750
vs
RTX A400 A400
FX 5900 Ultra NVIDIA FX 5900 Ultra
vs
FX 1300 1300

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.8 216 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 24 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2000 or Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.