RTX A500 Mobile vs Quadro P2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 with RTX A500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P2000
2017
5 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
18.91
+8.4%

P2000 outperforms RTX A500 Mobile by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking306326
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.23no data
Power efficiency17.2819.92
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGP106GA107S
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date6 February 2017 (8 years ago)22 March 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 MHz1537 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt60 Watt (20 - 60 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate94.7298.37
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS6.296 TFLOPS
ROPs4048
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 x16
Length201 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 GB4 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

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 18.91
+8.4%
RTX A500 Mobile 17.44

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

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
+8.5%
RTX A500 Mobile 6701

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.

Quadro P2000 8387
RTX A500 Mobile 10818
+29%

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.

Quadro P2000 32964
RTX A500 Mobile 40923
+24.1%

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.

Quadro P2000 6847
RTX A500 Mobile 7598
+11%

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.

Quadro P2000 43566
RTX A500 Mobile 48496
+11.3%

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
+21.7%
46
−21.7%
1440p20
−15%
23
+15%
4K16
+300%
4
−300%

Cost per frame, $

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

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 45−50
+9.5%
40−45
−9.5%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−27.3%
42
+27.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+8.8%
30−35
−8.8%
Atomic Heart 45−50
+9.5%
40−45
−9.5%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+7.2%
65−70
−7.2%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+3.1%
32
−3.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+8.8%
30−35
−8.8%
Far Cry 5 47
−14.9%
54
+14.9%
Fortnite 144
+60%
90−95
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+7.4%
65−70
−7.4%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+8.9%
45−50
−8.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
−15.1%
60−65
+15.1%
Valorant 130−140
+5.4%
120−130
−5.4%
Atomic Heart 45−50
+9.5%
40−45
−9.5%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+7.2%
65−70
−7.2%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+37.5%
24
−37.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+4.7%
210−220
−4.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+8.8%
30−35
−8.8%
Dota 2 102
+3%
95−100
−3%
Far Cry 5 41
−17.1%
48
+17.1%
Fortnite 60
−50%
90−95
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+7.4%
65−70
−7.4%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+8.9%
45−50
−8.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+1.5%
66
−1.5%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 41
−48.8%
60−65
+48.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
−44.7%
55
+44.7%
Valorant 130−140
+5.4%
120−130
−5.4%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+7.2%
65−70
−7.2%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+65%
20
−65%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+8.8%
30−35
−8.8%
Dota 2 98
−1%
95−100
+1%
Far Cry 5 35
−25.7%
44
+25.7%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+7.4%
65−70
−7.4%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+8.9%
45−50
−8.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
−110%
60−65
+110%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
−16%
29
+16%
Valorant 130−140
+5.4%
120−130
−5.4%
Fortnite 45
−100%
90−95
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+7.5%
120−130
−7.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+0%
30
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+4.3%
160−170
−4.3%
Valorant 170−180
+5.5%
160−170
−5.5%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+8.7%
45−50
−8.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 21
−71.4%
35−40
+71.4%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+10%
40−45
−10%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+10.3%
27−30
−10.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+7.7%
24−27
−7.7%
Fortnite 24
−54.2%
35−40
+54.2%
Atomic Heart 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−76.9%
21−24
+76.9%
Valorant 100−105
+9.9%
90−95
−9.9%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+300%
2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Dota 2 60−65
+6.9%
55−60
−6.9%
Far Cry 5 9
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+6.9%
27−30
−6.9%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7
−129%
16−18
+129%
Fortnite 10
−60%
16−18
+60%

This is how Quadro P2000 and RTX A500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is 22% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A500 Mobile is 15% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 is 300% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P2000 is 300% faster.
  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX A500 Mobile is 129% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is ahead in 48 tests (72%)
  • RTX A500 Mobile is ahead in 18 tests (27%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.91 17.44
Recency 6 February 2017 22 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 5 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 8.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 25% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX A500 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro P2000 and RTX A500 Mobile.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation card while RTX A500 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 RTX A500 Mobile
RTX A500

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
667 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2
91 vote

Rate RTX A500 Mobile 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 RTX A500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.