AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

T2000 Max-Q
2019
4 GB GDDR5
17.87
+15.5%

Quadro T2000 Max-Q outperforms Radeon Pro 5300M by 16% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking286318
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for moneyno data3.65
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)Navi / RDNA (2019−2020)
GPU code nameN19P-Q3 MAX-QNavi 14
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date27 May 2019 (4 years old)13 November 2019 (4 years old)
Current priceno data$2068
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores10241280
Core clock speed930 / 1200 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1500 / 1620 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 - 40 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate103.7100.0

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro T2000 Max-Q and Radeon Pro 5300M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

Memory

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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.5no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

T2000 Max-Q 17.87
+15.5%
Pro 5300M 15.47

Quadro T2000 Max-Q outperforms Radeon Pro 5300M by 16% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

T2000 Max-Q 6923
+15.5%
Pro 5300M 5994

Quadro T2000 Max-Q outperforms Radeon Pro 5300M by 15% in Passmark.

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 HD58
+16%
50−55
−16%
1440p26
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
4K38
+26.7%
30−35
−26.7%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 53
+65.6%
30−35
−65.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+19.2%
24−27
−19.2%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+13.2%
50−55
−13.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+15%
40−45
−15%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+17.5%
40−45
−17.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 58
+38.1%
40−45
−38.1%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+14.8%
50−55
−14.8%
Hitman 3 50−55
+18.6%
40−45
−18.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+15.2%
30−35
−15.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+11.5%
24−27
−11.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 56
+75%
30−35
−75%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45
+40.6%
30−35
−40.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+19.2%
24−27
−19.2%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+13.2%
50−55
−13.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+15%
40−45
−15%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+17.5%
40−45
−17.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 55
+31%
40−45
−31%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+14.8%
50−55
−14.8%
Hitman 3 50−55
+18.6%
40−45
−18.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+15.2%
30−35
−15.2%
Metro Exodus 33
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+11.5%
24−27
−11.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+40.6%
30−35
−40.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63
+90.9%
30−35
−90.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
−28%
30−35
+28%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+19.2%
24−27
−19.2%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+13.2%
50−55
−13.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+17.5%
40−45
−17.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 50
+19%
40−45
−19%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+14.8%
50−55
−14.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+13%
21−24
−13%
Hitman 3 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+18.2%
30−35
−18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+20%
24−27
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Hitman 3 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Battlefield 5 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

This is how T2000 Max-Q and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • T2000 Max-Q is 16% faster than Pro 5300M

1440p resolution:

  • T2000 Max-Q is 23.8% faster than Pro 5300M

4K resolution:

  • T2000 Max-Q is 26.7% faster than Pro 5300M

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Max-Q is 90.9% faster than the Pro 5300M.
  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 28% faster than the T2000 Max-Q.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Max-Q is ahead in 65 tests (96%)
  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 17.87 15.47
Recency 27 May 2019 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 5300M in performance tests.


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

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Quadro T2000 Max-Q
AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User Ratings

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 52 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 158 votes

Rate AMD Radeon Pro 5300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.