Radeon R9 M485X vs Quadro P2000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
P1000 P2000 Mobile P2000 Max-Q P3000 Mobile P3200 P3200 Max-Q P4000 Mobile P4000 Max-Q P4200 P5000 Mobile P5200 P5200 Max-Q
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
E8950 R9 M295X R9 M295X Mac Edition R9 M390X R9 M395X R9 M395X Mac Edition R9 M485X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 Mobile with Radeon R9 M485X, including specs and performance data.

P2000 Mobile
2019
3.75 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
14.32
+57.5%

P2000 Mobile outperforms R9 M485X by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
P2000 Mobile P2000 Mobile
R9 M485X R9 M485X

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking401524
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.702.80
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGP106Amethyst
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date15 February 2019 (7 years ago)15 May 2016 (9 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 cores11522048
Core clock speed1291 MHz723 MHz
Boost clock speed1291 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,400 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate92.9592.54
Floating-point processing power2.974 TFLOPS2.961 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs72128
L1 Cache432 KB512 KB
L2 Cache1280 KB512 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 x16MXM-B (3.0)
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 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 GB/s160.0 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.

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 Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.21.2.131
CUDA6.1-

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 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 14.32 9.09
Recency 15 February 2019 15 May 2016
Maximum RAM amount 3.75 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 250 Watt

P2000 Mobile has a 58% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 233% lower power consumption.

R9 M485X, on the other hand, has a 113% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Quadro P2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M485X in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 M485X is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
M4000M Quadro M4000M
R9 M485X Radeon R9 M485X
vs
GTX 680MX GeForce GTX 680MX
P2000 Mobile Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
Pro 5300M Radeon Pro 5300M
HD 7350 OEM PCI AMD Radeon HD 7350 OEM PCI
vs
Playstation 3 RSX 90nm 3 RSX 90nm
HD 7350 OEM PCI AMD Radeon HD 7350 OEM PCI
vs
Tegra 4i GPU 4i GPU
HD 7350 OEM PCI AMD Radeon HD 7350 OEM PCI
vs
Vega 6 Embedded Vega 6 Embedded
Playstation 3 RSX 65nm NVIDIA Playstation 3 RSX 65nm
vs
UHD Graphics 750 (Alder Lake) Graphics 750 (Alder Lake)
Playstation 3 RSX 90nm NVIDIA Playstation 3 RSX 90nm
vs
RTX 3060 Ti GA103 RTX 3060 Ti GA103
P2000 Mobile NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
GeForce 920M GeForce 920M
P2000 Mobile NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
8400M GS GeForce 8400M GS
P2000 Mobile NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
ATI HD 4770 HD 4770
P2000 Mobile NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
RTX 2000 Ada Generation RTX 2000 Ada Generation
P2000 Mobile NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Mobile
vs
Arc 130V Mobile Arc 130V Mobile

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

4.1 132 votes

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

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

Rate Radeon R9 M485X 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 R9 M485X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.