Radeon RX 480 vs Quadro P2000

Place in the ranking	291	247
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.57	15.63
Power efficiency	17.51	10.38
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	GP106	Ellesmere
GCN generation	no data	4th Gen
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	6 February 2017 (7 years ago)	29 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$585	$229

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 480 has 63% better value for money than Quadro P2000.

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 cores	1024	2304
Compute units	no data	36
Core clock speed	1076 MHz	1120 MHz
Boost clock speed	1480 MHz	1266 MHz
Number of transistors	4,400 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	94.72	182.3
Floating-point processing power	3.031 TFLOPS	5.834 TFLOPS
ROPs	40	32
TMUs	64	144

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).

Bus support	no data	n/a
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	201 mm	241 mm
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire	-	+

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	160 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1752 MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	140.2 GB/s	224 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 Connectors	4x DisplayPort	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	-	2.0
DisplayPort support	-	1.4HDR

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	-	n/a
CrossFire	-	+
Enduro	-	n/a
FRTC	-	+
FreeSync	-	+
HD3D	-	n/a
LiquidVR	-	+
PowerTune	-	+
TressFX	-	+
TrueAudio	-	n/a
ZeroCore	-	+
UVD	-	+
VCE	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	+
Mantle	-	n/a
CUDA	6.1	-

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. 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 18.84

RX 480 22.33
+18.5%

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

RX 480 8613
+18.5%

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

RX 480 17919
+114%

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

RX 480 39552
+20%

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

RX 480 12186
+78%

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

RX 480 72213
+65.8%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Quadro P2000 350317

RX 480 383333
+9.4%

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	55 −40%	77 +40%
1440p	22 −100%	44 +100%
4K	18 −94.4%	35 +94.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	10.64	2.97
1440p	26.59	5.20
4K	32.50	6.54

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

30−33

−20%

35−40
+20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −38.1%	58 +38.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 −22.6%	35−40 +22.6%
Battlefield 5	60−65 −17.7%	70−75 +17.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −18.4%	45−50 +18.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%
Far Cry 5	42 −23.8%	50−55 +23.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 −15.7%	55−60 +15.7%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −13.6%	130−140 +13.6%
Hitman 3	35−40 −18.9%	40−45 +18.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 −14.1%	100−110 +14.1%
Metro Exodus	65−70 −43.1%	93 +43.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −15.7%	55−60 +15.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	77 −42.9%	110 +42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −10.2%	95−100 +10.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 −121%	93 +121%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 −22.6%	35−40 +22.6%
Battlefield 5	60−65 +29.2%	48 −29.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −18.4%	45−50 +18.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%
Far Cry 5	33 −57.6%	50−55 +57.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +64.5%	31 −64.5%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 −13.6%	130−140 +13.6%
Hitman 3	35−40 −18.9%	40−45 +18.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 −14.1%	100−110 +14.1%
Metro Exodus	65−70 −20%	78 +20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −15.7%	55−60 +15.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 −21%	75−80 +21%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 −14%	45−50 +14%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −10.2%	95−100 +10.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	40−45 +20%	35 −20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30−35 −22.6%	35−40 +22.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	35−40 −18.4%	45−50 +18.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 −20%	35−40 +20%
Far Cry 5	26 −73.1%	45 +73.1%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +53.2%	77 −53.2%
Hitman 3	35−40 −18.9%	40−45 +18.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	90−95 −14.1%	100−110 +14.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60−65 −21%	75−80 +21%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 −76%	44 +76%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 −10.2%	95−100 +10.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

50−55

−15.7%

55−60
+15.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −80.6%	65 +80.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 −44.8%	42 +44.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 −21.1%	21−24 +21.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −23.5%	21−24 +23.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −19%	24−27 +19%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Far Cry 5	14 −114%	30 +114%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −21.2%	120−130 +21.2%
Hitman 3	21−24 −18.2%	24−27 +18.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −21.1%	45−50 +21.1%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −42.9%	50 +42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 −23.7%	45−50 +23.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −28.6%	27−30 +28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	110−120 −15.2%	120−130 +15.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35

−19.4%

35−40
+19.4%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −72.2%	31 +72.2%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −50%	21 +50%
Hitman 3	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100 +61.7%	60 −61.7%
Metro Exodus	20−22 −25%	25 +25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 −108%	27 +108%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 −54.5%	17 +54.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Far Cry 5	7 −114%	15 +114%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −19.2%	30−35 +19.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 −23.8%	24−27 +23.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

−11.8%

18−20
+11.8%

This is how Quadro P2000 and RX 480 compete in popular games:

RX 480 is 40% faster in 1080p
RX 480 is 100% faster in 1440p
RX 480 is 94% faster in 4K

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

in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P2000 is 65% faster.
in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 480 is 121% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P2000 is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
RX 480 is ahead in 67 tests (93%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.84	22.33
Recency	6 February 2017	29 June 2016
Maximum RAM amount	5 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	150 Watt

Quadro P2000 has an age advantage of 7 months, and 100% lower power consumption.

RX 480, on the other hand, has a 18.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 480 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.