Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	212	268
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	22.69	23.88
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	TU106	TU117
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

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	2304	1024
Core clock speed	945 MHz	1575 MHz
Boost clock speed	1380 MHz	1785 MHz
Number of transistors	10,800 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	80 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	198.7	114.2
Floating-point processing power	6.359 TFLOPS	3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	144	64
Tensor Cores	288	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	36	no data

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).

Laptop size	large	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16

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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	128.0 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	No outputs	No outputs
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	7.5	7.5

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.

RTX 3000 Mobile 26.31
+26.7%

T2000 Mobile 20.77

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.

RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+26.7%

T2000 Mobile 7985

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.

RTX 3000 Mobile 19879
+47%

T2000 Mobile 13524

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	103 +28.8%	80−85 −28.8%
4K	88 +35.4%	65−70 −35.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +32.4%	35−40 −32.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +31.7%	40−45 −31.7%
Elden Ring	85−90 +31.8%	65−70 −31.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +21.2%	65−70 −21.2%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +32.4%	35−40 −32.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +31.7%	40−45 −31.7%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +31.8%	85−90 −31.8%
Metro Exodus	91 +62.5%	55−60 −62.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +21.3%	45−50 −21.3%
Valorant	100−110 +25%	80−85 −25%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +21.2%	65−70 −21.2%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +32.4%	35−40 −32.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +31.7%	40−45 −31.7%
Dota 2	44 −65.9%	70−75 +65.9%
Elden Ring	85−90 +31.8%	65−70 −31.8%
Far Cry 5	86 +26.5%	65−70 −26.5%
Fortnite	130−140 +19.3%	100−110 −19.3%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +31.8%	85−90 −31.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	85−90 +21.9%	70−75 −21.9%
Metro Exodus	43 −30.2%	55−60 +30.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110 −25.5%	130−140 +25.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +21.3%	45−50 −21.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	85−90 +30.3%	65−70 −30.3%
Valorant	100−110 +25%	80−85 −25%
World of Tanks	260−270 +11.4%	230−240 −11.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +21.2%	65−70 −21.2%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +32.4%	35−40 −32.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +31.7%	40−45 −31.7%
Dota 2	121 +65.8%	70−75 −65.8%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +16.2%	65−70 −16.2%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +31.8%	85−90 −31.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +17.4%	130−140 −17.4%
Valorant	100−110 +25%	80−85 −25%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45−50 +36.4%	30−35 −36.4%
Elden Ring	45−50 +34.3%	35−40 −34.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 +32.4%	30−35 −32.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +1.7%	170−180 −1.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +26.3%	18−20 −26.3%
World of Tanks	170−180 +23.6%	140−150 −23.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +26.2%	40−45 −26.2%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +35.3%	16−18 −35.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +35.3%	16−18 −35.3%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +36.8%	55−60 −36.8%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +29.6%	50−55 −29.6%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +27.7%	45−50 −27.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +34.5%	27−30 −34.5%
Valorant	70−75 +33.3%	50−55 −33.3%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +41.2%	16−18 −41.2%
Dota 2	45−50 +31.4%	35−40 −31.4%
Elden Ring	21−24 +40%	14−16 −40%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 +31.4%	35−40 −31.4%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +30.6%	60−65 −30.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +30.8%	12−14 −30.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +31.4%	35−40 −31.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +41.2%	16−18 −41.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Dota 2	88 +151%	35−40 −151%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +29.6%	27−30 −29.6%
Fortnite	30−35 +32%	24−27 −32%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +32.3%	30−35 −32.3%
Valorant	35−40 +40%	24−27 −40%

This is how RTX 3000 Mobile and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

RTX 3000 Mobile is 29% faster in 1080p
RTX 3000 Mobile is 35% faster in 4K

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

in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3000 Mobile is 151% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 66% faster.

All in all, in popular games: