GRID K220Q vs Quadro P2000
Aggregated performance score
Quadro P2000 outperforms GRID K220Q by 696% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 278 | 804 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 14.00 | no data |
Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | GP106 | GK104 |
Market segment | Workstation | Workstation |
Release date | 6 February 2017 (7 years ago) | 2 July 2014 (9 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $585 | $469 |
Current price | $371 (0.6x MSRP) | no data |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 1024 | 1536 |
Core clock speed | 1076 MHz | 745 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 4,400 million | 3,540 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 225 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 94.72 | 95.36 |
Floating-point performance | 3,031 gflops | 2,289 gflops |
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).
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 201 mm | no data |
Width | 1-slot | IGP |
Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 5 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bus width | 160 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | 5000 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 140.2 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |
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 Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | No outputs |
API Compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | + | 1.1.126 |
CUDA | 6.1 | 3.0 |
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.
Quadro P2000 outperforms GRID K220Q by 696% based on our aggregated 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%
Quadro P2000 outperforms GRID K220Q by 697% 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 HD | 57
+714%
| 7−8
−714%
|
1440p | 20
+900%
| 2−3
−900%
|
4K | 16
+700%
| 2−3
−700%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40
+875%
|
4−5
−875%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+725%
|
4−5
−725%
|
Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+800%
|
7−8
−800%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 45−50
+700%
|
6−7
−700%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Far Cry 5 | 47
+840%
|
5−6
−840%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55
+750%
|
6−7
−750%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+713%
|
8−9
−713%
|
Hitman 3 | 50−55
+800%
|
6−7
−800%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 40−45
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+933%
|
3−4
−933%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40−45
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+800%
|
4−5
−800%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40
+875%
|
4−5
−875%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+725%
|
4−5
−725%
|
Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+800%
|
7−8
−800%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 45−50
+700%
|
6−7
−700%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Far Cry 5 | 41
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55
+750%
|
6−7
−750%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+713%
|
8−9
−713%
|
Hitman 3 | 50−55
+800%
|
6−7
−800%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 40−45
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
Metro Exodus | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+933%
|
3−4
−933%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40−45
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 38
+850%
|
4−5
−850%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+800%
|
4−5
−800%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40
+875%
|
4−5
−875%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−35
+725%
|
4−5
−725%
|
Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+800%
|
7−8
−800%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Far Cry 5 | 35
+775%
|
4−5
−775%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 50−55
+750%
|
6−7
−750%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+713%
|
8−9
−713%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 25
+733%
|
3−4
−733%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+800%
|
4−5
−800%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 27−30
+833%
|
3−4
−833%
|
Hitman 3 | 30−33
+900%
|
3−4
−900%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 24−27
+733%
|
3−4
−733%
|
Metro Exodus | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 24−27
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
Far Cry 5 | 21
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
+800%
|
4−5
−800%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+850%
|
4−5
−850%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
Hitman 3 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
Metro Exodus | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 13
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+950%
|
2−3
−950%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 9
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+767%
|
3−4
−767%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
This is how Quadro P2000 and GRID K220Q compete in popular games:
- Quadro P2000 is 714% faster than GRID K220Q in 1080p
- Quadro P2000 is 900% faster than GRID K220Q in 1440p
- Quadro P2000 is 700% faster than GRID K220Q in 4K
Pros & Cons Summary
Performance score | 18.78 | 2.36 |
Recency | 6 February 2017 | 2 July 2014 |
Cost | $585 | $469 |
Maximum RAM amount | 5 GB | 512 MB |
Chip lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 225 Watt |
The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K220Q in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with Similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.