GeForce MX570 vs Quadro P2000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 with GeForce MX570, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P2000
2017
5 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
18.80
+27.3%

P2000 outperforms MX570 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking304361
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.75no data
Power efficiency17.3040.76
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGP106GA107
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date6 February 2017 (8 years ago)May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$585 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores10242048
Core clock speed1076 MHz832 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHz1155 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate94.7273.92
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS4.731 TFLOPS
ROPs4040
TMUs6464
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length201 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount5 GB2 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth140.2 GB/s96 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA6.18.6
DLSS-+

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.

Quadro P2000 18.80
+27.3%
GeForce MX570 14.77

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 P2000 7268
+27.2%
GeForce MX570 5712

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 HD56
+47.4%
38
−47.4%
1440p20
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
4K16
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.45no data
1440p29.25no data
4K36.56no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+30.6%
35−40
−30.6%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+32%
24−27
−32%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+30.6%
35−40
−30.6%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+23.3%
60−65
−23.3%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+32%
24−27
−32%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%
Far Cry 5 47
+0%
45−50
+0%
Fortnite 144
+82.3%
75−80
−82.3%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+25.9%
55−60
−25.9%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+28.9%
35−40
−28.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
+3.9%
50−55
−3.9%
Valorant 130−140
+16.2%
110−120
−16.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 45−50
+30.6%
35−40
−30.6%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+23.3%
60−65
−23.3%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+32%
24−27
−32%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+16.3%
190−200
−16.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%
Dota 2 102
+14.6%
85−90
−14.6%
Far Cry 5 41
−14.6%
45−50
+14.6%
Fortnite 60
−31.7%
75−80
+31.7%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+25.9%
55−60
−25.9%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+28.9%
35−40
−28.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+24.1%
54
−24.1%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+31%
27−30
−31%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 41
−24.4%
50−55
+24.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+16.2%
110−120
−16.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+23.3%
60−65
−23.3%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+32%
24−27
−32%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%
Dota 2 98
+10.1%
85−90
−10.1%
Far Cry 5 35
−34.3%
45−50
+34.3%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+25.9%
55−60
−25.9%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+28.9%
35−40
−28.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
−75.9%
50−55
+75.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
−36%
34
+36%
Valorant 130−140
+16.2%
110−120
−16.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45
−75.6%
75−80
+75.6%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+24%
100−110
−24%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+36.4%
21−24
−36.4%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+35.3%
16−18
−35.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+30.5%
120−130
−30.5%
Valorant 170−180
+18.6%
140−150
−18.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+28.2%
35−40
−28.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+29.4%
30−35
−29.4%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+28%
24−27
−28%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+27.3%
21−24
−27.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24
−29.2%
30−35
+29.2%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+23.1%
24−27
−23.1%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−46.2%
18−20
+46.2%
Valorant 100−105
+31.6%
75−80
−31.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+30%
20−22
−30%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Dota 2 60−65
+24%
50−55
−24%
Far Cry 5 9
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+29.2%
24−27
−29.2%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10
−30%
12−14
+30%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how Quadro P2000 and GeForce MX570 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is 47% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P2000 is 43% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 is 33% faster in 4K

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

  • in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P2000 is 82% faster.
  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX570 is 86% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is ahead in 51 test (76%)
  • GeForce MX570 is ahead in 13 tests (19%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.80 14.77
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 25 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 27.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 150% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX570, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX570 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation card while GeForce MX570 is a notebook one.

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
Quadro P2000
NVIDIA GeForce MX570
GeForce MX570

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.


3.5 665 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 94 votes

Rate GeForce MX570 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P2000 or GeForce MX570, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.