Tesla K20c vs Quadro P2000

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 and Tesla K20c, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro P2000
2017
5 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
16.27
+111%

P2000 outperforms Tesla K20c by a whopping 111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking311505
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.390.38
Power efficiency17.192.72
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGP106GK110
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date6 February 2017 (8 years ago)12 November 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$585 $3,199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Quadro P2000 has 2371% better value for money than Tesla K20c.

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 cores10242496
Core clock speed1076 MHz706 MHz
Boost clock speed1480 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,400 million7,080 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate94.72146.8
Floating-point processing power3.031 TFLOPS3.524 TFLOPS
ROPs4040
TMUs64208

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 2.0 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount5 GB5 GB
Memory bus width160 Bit320 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz1300 MHz
Memory bandwidth140.2 GB/s208.0 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 DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA6.13.5

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
+133%
24−27
−133%
1440p20
+122%
9−10
−122%
4K16
+129%
7−8
−129%

Cost per frame, $

1080p10.45
+1176%
133.29
−1176%
1440p29.25
+1115%
355.44
−1115%
4K36.56
+1150%
457.00
−1150%
  • Quadro P2000 has 1176% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • Quadro P2000 has 1115% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 has 1150% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+124%
45−50
−124%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+111%
35−40
−111%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+124%
45−50
−124%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Far Cry 5 47
+124%
21−24
−124%
Fortnite 144
+122%
65−70
−122%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+143%
30−33
−143%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+133%
24−27
−133%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
+121%
24−27
−121%
Valorant 130−140
+127%
60−65
−127%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+111%
35−40
−111%
Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+124%
45−50
−124%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+120%
100−105
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Dota 2 102
+127%
45−50
−127%
Far Cry 5 41
+128%
18−20
−128%
Fortnite 60
+122%
27−30
−122%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+143%
30−33
−143%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+133%
24−27
−133%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+123%
30−33
−123%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+111%
18−20
−111%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 41
+128%
18−20
−128%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38
+111%
18−20
−111%
Valorant 130−140
+127%
60−65
−127%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+111%
35−40
−111%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Dota 2 98
+118%
45−50
−118%
Far Cry 5 35
+119%
16−18
−119%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+143%
30−33
−143%
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40
+119%
16−18
−119%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
+142%
12−14
−142%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+150%
10−11
−150%
Valorant 130−140
+127%
60−65
−127%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45
+114%
21−24
−114%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+125%
16−18
−125%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+115%
60−65
−115%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+130%
10−11
−130%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+120%
75−80
−120%
Valorant 170−180
+114%
80−85
−114%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+138%
21−24
−138%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Far Cry 5 21
+133%
9−10
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+144%
18−20
−144%
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22
+122%
9−10
−122%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24
+140%
10−11
−140%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+129%
14−16
−129%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+117%
6−7
−117%
Valorant 100−105
+122%
45−50
−122%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Dota 2 60−65
+130%
27−30
−130%
Far Cry 5 9
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+121%
14−16
−121%
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7
+133%
3−4
−133%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10
+150%
4−5
−150%

This is how Quadro P2000 and Tesla K20c compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P2000 is 133% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P2000 is 122% faster in 1440p
  • Quadro P2000 is 129% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.27 7.71
Recency 6 February 2017 12 November 2012
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 225 Watt

Quadro P2000 has a 111% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Tesla K20c 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 Tesla K20c
Tesla K20c

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
4.7 12 votes

Rate Tesla K20c on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P2000 or Tesla K20c, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.