Radeon 8040S vs Quadro M2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000 with Radeon 8040S, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M2000
2016, $438
4 GB 128-bit, 75 Watt
9.65

8040S outperforms M2000 by a whopping 158% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking497254
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.59no data
Power efficiency9.9134.92
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025)
GPU code nameGM206Strix Halo
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 April 2016 (9 years ago)6 January 2025 (1 year 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 cores7681024
Core clock speed796 MHz1295 MHz
Boost clock speed1163 MHz2800 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate55.82179.2
Floating-point processing power1.786 TFLOPS5.734 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs4864
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cache288 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KB8 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 5.0 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 BitSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1653 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/sno data
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 DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Number of simultaneous displays4no data

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
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_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA5.2-

Synthetic benchmarks

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 9.65
Radeon 8040S 24.94
+158%

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 4039
Samples: 1212
Radeon 8040S 10431
+158%
Samples: 5

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 54 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.65 24.94
Recency 8 April 2016 6 January 2025
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 55 Watt

Radeon 8040S has a 158.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 36.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 8040S is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 8040S is a notebook one.

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.


3.8 232 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon 8040S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M2000 or Radeon 8040S, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.