Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Quadro P1000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P1000 with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P1000
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 40 Watt
11.64

T2000 Mobile outperforms P1000 by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking415269
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.75no data
Power efficiency20.0823.88
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP107TU117
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date7 February 2017 (7 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$375 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores6401024
Core clock speed1493 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1519 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate48.61114.2
Floating-point processing power1.555 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3264

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 datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
WidthMXM Moduleno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/s128.0 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA6.17.5

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.

Quadro P1000 11.64
T2000 Mobile 20.77
+78.4%

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 P1000 4475
T2000 Mobile 7985
+78.4%

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.

Quadro P1000 6001
T2000 Mobile 13524
+125%

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 HD46
−73.9%
80−85
+73.9%
4K11
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.15no data
4K34.09no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−76.2%
35−40
+76.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−78.3%
40−45
+78.3%
Elden Ring 30−35
−94.1%
65−70
+94.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−73.7%
65−70
+73.7%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−76.2%
35−40
+76.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−78.3%
40−45
+78.3%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−91.3%
85−90
+91.3%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−75%
55−60
+75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
−56.7%
45−50
+56.7%
Valorant 45−50
−86.7%
80−85
+86.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−73.7%
65−70
+73.7%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−76.2%
35−40
+76.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−78.3%
40−45
+78.3%
Dota 2 40−45
−73.8%
70−75
+73.8%
Elden Ring 30−35
−94.1%
65−70
+94.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−47.8%
65−70
+47.8%
Fortnite 41
−166%
100−110
+166%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−91.3%
85−90
+91.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−73.8%
70−75
+73.8%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−75%
55−60
+75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 103
−34%
130−140
+34%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
−56.7%
45−50
+56.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−88.6%
65−70
+88.6%
Valorant 45−50
−86.7%
80−85
+86.7%
World of Tanks 160−170
−45.7%
230−240
+45.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−73.7%
65−70
+73.7%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−76.2%
35−40
+76.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−78.3%
40−45
+78.3%
Dota 2 40−45
−73.8%
70−75
+73.8%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−47.8%
65−70
+47.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−91.3%
85−90
+91.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
−56.8%
130−140
+56.8%
Valorant 45−50
−86.7%
80−85
+86.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−120%
30−35
+120%
Elden Ring 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−113%
30−35
+113%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
−173%
170−180
+173%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−90%
18−20
+90%
World of Tanks 80−85
−68.7%
140−150
+68.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−82.6%
40−45
+82.6%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−113%
16−18
+113%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−119%
55−60
+119%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−100%
50−55
+100%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−95.8%
45−50
+95.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−107%
27−30
+107%
Valorant 27−30
−86.2%
50−55
+86.2%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Dota 2 21−24
−59.1%
35−40
+59.1%
Elden Ring 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−59.1%
35−40
+59.1%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−82.4%
60−65
+82.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−59.1%
35−40
+59.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Dota 2 21−24
−59.1%
35−40
+59.1%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−92.9%
27−30
+92.9%
Fortnite 12−14
−92.3%
24−27
+92.3%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−107%
30−35
+107%
Valorant 12−14
−108%
24−27
+108%

This is how Quadro P1000 and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 74% faster in 1080p
  • T2000 Mobile is 64% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 183% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, T2000 Mobile surpassed Quadro P1000 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.64 20.77
Recency 7 February 2017 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro P1000 has 50% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 78.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P1000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P1000 is a workstation card while Quadro T2000 Mobile 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 P1000
Quadro P1000
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 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.


3.5 580 votes

Rate Quadro P1000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 398 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.