Radeon RX Vega 7 vs Quadro M2000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000M with Radeon RX Vega 7, including specs and performance data.

M2000M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
8.99
+21.3%

M2000M outperforms RX Vega 7 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking479530
Place by popularitynot in top-10012
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGM107Vega Raven Ridge
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date3 December 2015 (8 years ago)7 January 2020 (4 years ago)

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 cores640448
Core clock speed1029 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1098 MHz1800 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate43.92no data
Floating-point processing power1.405 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs40no data

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1253 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno data
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 data
Display Port1.2no 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 compatibility

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

DirectX1212_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA5.0-

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. 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 8.99
+21.3%
RX Vega 7 7.41

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

M2000M 20567
+16.1%
RX Vega 7 17714

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

M2000M 5143
RX Vega 7 5249
+2.1%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

M2000M 4157
+24.2%
RX Vega 7 3348

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

M2000M 29795
+20.5%
RX Vega 7 24726

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

M2000M 53
+51.4%
RX Vega 7 35

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

M2000M 36
+5.3%
RX Vega 7 34

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

M2000M 70
+19%
RX Vega 7 59

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

M2000M 33
RX Vega 7 38
+13.6%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

M2000M 46
+32.4%
RX Vega 7 35

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

M2000M 40
+46.5%
RX Vega 7 27

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

M2000M 15
+14.8%
RX Vega 7 13

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

M2000M 22
+14.1%
RX Vega 7 19

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

M2000M 3
+88.2%
RX Vega 7 2

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
+52.2%
23
−52.2%
1440p40−45
+21.2%
33
−21.2%
4K11
−45.5%
16
+45.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−28.6%
18
+28.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−46.2%
19
+46.2%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+22.7%
21−24
−22.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+5.9%
17
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+23.5%
17
−23.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+22.4%
45−50
−22.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
+21.4%
14
−21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+16.3%
40−45
−16.3%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+3.7%
27
−3.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−8%
27
+8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+20%
24−27
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−58.3%
95
+58.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−59.1%
35
+59.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−15.4%
15
+15.4%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+22.7%
21−24
−22.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+40%
10
−40%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+22.4%
45−50
−22.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
+21.4%
14
−21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−46%
73
+46%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+33.3%
21
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+47.1%
17
−47.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+25%
24
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+227%
21−24
−227%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−33.3%
80
+33.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+55.6%
9
−55.6%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+122%
27
−122%
Hitman 3 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+127%
22
−127%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+42.9%
21
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+7.7%
13
−7.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+38.9%
18
−38.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Hitman 3 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+21.3%
45−50
−21.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+177%
13
−177%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+125%
4−5
−125%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

This is how M2000M and RX Vega 7 compete in popular games:

  • M2000M is 52% faster in 1080p
  • M2000M is 21% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 7 is 45% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the M2000M is 227% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 7 is 59% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • M2000M is ahead in 61 test (85%)
  • RX Vega 7 is ahead in 8 tests (11%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.99 7.41
Recency 3 December 2015 7 January 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

M2000M has a 21.3% higher aggregate performance score.

RX Vega 7, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 266.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M2000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 7 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M2000M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX Vega 7 is a mobile workstation one.


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
AMD Radeon RX Vega 7
Radeon RX Vega 7

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.


3.6 488 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 4879 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 7 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.