Quadro T1000 Max-Q vs M2000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

M2000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
8.94

T1000 Max-Q outperforms M2000M by an impressive 95% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking454293
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.50no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameGM107N19P-Q1
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date2 October 2015 (8 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Current price$363 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores640768
Core clock speed1038 MHz795 / 1230 MHz
Boost clock speed1197 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt35 - 40 Watt
Texture fill rate43.9275.60
Floating-point performance1,405 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro M2000M and Quadro T1000 Max-Q compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHz8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s80 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
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+no data
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.2
CUDA5.07.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

M2000M 8.94
T1000 Max-Q 17.40
+94.6%

T1000 Max-Q outperforms M2000M by 95% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

M2000M 3455
T1000 Max-Q 6720
+94.5%

T1000 Max-Q outperforms M2000M by 95% in Passmark.

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 HD32
−87.5%
60−65
+87.5%
4K11
−90.9%
21−24
+90.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−92.9%
27−30
+92.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−123%
27−30
+123%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−111%
55−60
+111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−92.9%
27−30
+92.9%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−105%
40−45
+105%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−88%
45−50
+88%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−88.4%
80−85
+88.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
−100%
30−35
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−76.9%
65−70
+76.9%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−115%
55−60
+115%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−92%
45−50
+92%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−63.6%
50−55
+63.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−123%
27−30
+123%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−111%
55−60
+111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−92.9%
27−30
+92.9%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−105%
40−45
+105%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−88%
45−50
+88%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−88.4%
80−85
+88.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
−100%
30−35
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−76.9%
65−70
+76.9%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−115%
55−60
+115%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−92%
45−50
+92%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
−60.9%
35−40
+60.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−63.6%
50−55
+63.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−123%
27−30
+123%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−92.9%
27−30
+92.9%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−105%
40−45
+105%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−88.4%
80−85
+88.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−76.9%
65−70
+76.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−100%
55−60
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−164%
35−40
+164%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−63.6%
50−55
+63.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−92%
45−50
+92%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−100%
30−35
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−136%
30−35
+136%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−275%
14−16
+275%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−100%
21−24
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−150%
10−11
+150%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−107%
27−30
+107%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−113%
30−35
+113%
Hitman 3 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−84.2%
35−40
+84.2%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−167%
30−35
+167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−240%
30−35
+240%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−138%
18−20
+138%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−120%
10−12
+120%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−93.3%
27−30
+93.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Hitman 3 5−6
−160%
12−14
+160%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−175%
10−12
+175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−118%
24−27
+118%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%

This is how M2000M and T1000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • T1000 Max-Q is 88% faster in 1080p
  • T1000 Max-Q is 91% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T1000 Max-Q is 275% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, T1000 Max-Q surpassed M2000M in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.94 17.40
Recency 2 October 2015 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 35 Watt

The Quadro T1000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 M2000M
Quadro M2000M
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Quadro T1000 Max-Q

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.6 455 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 17 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.