Radeon Pro 560 vs Quadro P2000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 Mobile and Radeon Pro 560, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

P2000 Mobile
2019
3.75 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
13.32
+69.5%

P2000 Mobile outperforms Pro 560 by an impressive 69% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking398539
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.338.46
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGP106Polaris 21
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date15 February 2019 (6 years ago)18 April 2017 (8 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 cores11521024
Core clock speed1291 MHz907 MHz
Boost clock speed1291 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,400 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate92.9558.05
Floating-point processing power2.974 TFLOPS1.858 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs7264
L1 Cache432 KB256 KB
L2 Cache1280 KB1024 KB

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount3.75 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1270 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/s81.28 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
Optimus+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.21.2.131
CUDA6.1-

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.

P2000 Mobile 13.32
+69.5%
Pro 560 7.86

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.

P2000 Mobile 8387
+58.1%
Pro 560 5305

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.

P2000 Mobile 32964
+73.7%
Pro 560 18982

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.

P2000 Mobile 6847
+75.9%
Pro 560 3892

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.

P2000 Mobile 43566
+88.6%
Pro 560 23105

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

P2000 Mobile 350317
+76.2%
Pro 560 198867

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

P2000 Mobile 2046
+48.7%
Pro 560 1376

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 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.32 7.86
Recency 15 February 2019 18 April 2017
Maximum RAM amount 3.75 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 14 nm

P2000 Mobile has a 69.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

Pro 560, on the other hand, has a 6.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 560 in performance tests.

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 P2000 Mobile
Quadro P2000 Mobile
AMD Radeon Pro 560
Radeon Pro 560

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.


4.1 125 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 115 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P2000 Mobile or Radeon Pro 560, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.