Quadro RTX 8000 vs Quadro P2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 and Quadro RTX 8000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P2000
2017
5 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
16.27

RTX 8000 outperforms P2000 by a whopping 172% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking31162
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.312.32
Power efficiency17.1713.50
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP106TU102
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date6 February 2017 (8 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$585 $9,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Quadro P2000 has 301% better value for money than RTX 8000.

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 cores10244608
Core clock speed1076 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHz1770 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate94.72509.8
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs4096
TMUs64288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72

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 3.0 x16
Length201 mm267 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 GB48 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth140.2 GB/s672.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA6.17.5
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 16.27
RTX 8000 44.33
+172%

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
RTX 8000 19808
+173%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro P2000 22886
RTX 8000 146968
+542%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro P2000 23454
RTX 8000 125781
+436%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro P2000 21668
RTX 8000 144049
+565%

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
−168%
150−160
+168%
1440p20
−150%
50−55
+150%
4K16
−150%
40−45
+150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.45
+538%
66.66
−538%
1440p29.25
+584%
199.98
−584%
4K36.56
+584%
249.98
−584%
  • Quadro P2000 has 538% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • Quadro P2000 has 584% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 has 584% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
−167%
270−280
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−170%
100−105
+170%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
−165%
90−95
+165%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
−170%
200−210
+170%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
−167%
270−280
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−170%
100−105
+170%
Far Cry 5 47
−155%
120−130
+155%
Fortnite 144
−143%
350−400
+143%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−160%
190−200
+160%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
−168%
150−160
+168%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
−165%
90−95
+165%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
−164%
140−150
+164%
Valorant 130−140
−157%
350−400
+157%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
−170%
200−210
+170%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
−167%
270−280
+167%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
−150%
550−600
+150%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−170%
100−105
+170%
Dota 2 102
−165%
270−280
+165%
Far Cry 5 41
−168%
110−120
+168%
Fortnite 60
−167%
160−170
+167%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−160%
190−200
+160%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
−168%
150−160
+168%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
−169%
180−190
+169%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
−165%
90−95
+165%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−163%
100−105
+163%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 41
−168%
110−120
+168%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
−163%
100−105
+163%
Valorant 130−140
−157%
350−400
+157%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
−170%
200−210
+170%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
−170%
100−105
+170%
Dota 2 98
−165%
260−270
+165%
Far Cry 5 35
−171%
95−100
+171%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−160%
190−200
+160%
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
−165%
90−95
+165%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
−159%
75−80
+159%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
−160%
65−70
+160%
Valorant 130−140
−157%
350−400
+157%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45
−167%
120−130
+167%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−164%
95−100
+164%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
−171%
350−400
+171%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
−167%
80−85
+167%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−161%
60−65
+161%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−142%
400−450
+142%
Valorant 170−180
−163%
450−500
+163%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
−160%
130−140
+160%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−150%
40−45
+150%
Far Cry 5 21
−162%
55−60
+162%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−150%
110−120
+150%
Hogwarts Legacy 18−20
−163%
50−55
+163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−159%
70−75
+159%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24
−171%
65−70
+171%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−167%
40−45
+167%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−166%
85−90
+166%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−150%
35−40
+150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−169%
35−40
+169%
Valorant 95−100
−163%
260−270
+163%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−169%
70−75
+169%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−167%
40−45
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−157%
18−20
+157%
Dota 2 60−65
−158%
160−170
+158%
Far Cry 5 9
−167%
24−27
+167%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−158%
80−85
+158%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−12
−145%
27−30
+145%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7
−157%
18−20
+157%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10
−170%
27−30
+170%

This is how Quadro P2000 and RTX 8000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 8000 is 168% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 8000 is 150% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 8000 is 150% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.27 44.33
Recency 6 February 2017 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 48 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 260 Watt

Quadro P2000 has 246.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 8000, on the other hand, has a 172.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 860% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 33.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2000 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
Quadro P2000
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
Quadro RTX 8000

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.


3.5 691 vote

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 465 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 8000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P2000 or Quadro RTX 8000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.