UHD Graphics vs Quadro T2000 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro T2000 Max-Q with UHD Graphics, including specs and performance data.

T2000 Max-Q
2019
4 GB GDDR5, 40 Watt
17.73
+221%

T2000 Max-Q outperforms UHD Graphics by a whopping 221% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking320616
Place by popularitynot in top-1006
Power efficiency30.7338.32
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Generation 11.0 (2019−2021)
GPU code nameTU117Jasper Lake GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)11 January 2021 (4 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 cores1024256
Core clock speed1200 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1620 MHz750 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm10 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate103.712.00
Floating-point processing power3.318 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs6416

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed2000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA7.5-

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.

T2000 Max-Q 17.73
+221%
UHD Graphics 5.53

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.

T2000 Max-Q 6898
+221%
UHD Graphics 2151

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 HD57
+256%
16−18
−256%
1440p26
+225%
8−9
−225%
4K38
+280%
10−12
−280%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+244%
9−10
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+244%
9−10
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+256%
16−18
−256%
Fortnite 90−95
+241%
27−30
−241%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+229%
21−24
−229%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+229%
14−16
−229%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+250%
18−20
−250%
Valorant 130−140
+230%
40−45
−230%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
Battlefield 5 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+244%
9−10
−244%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220
+229%
65−70
−229%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Dota 2 124
+254%
35−40
−254%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+256%
16−18
−256%
Fortnite 90−95
+241%
27−30
−241%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+229%
21−24
−229%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+229%
14−16
−229%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+250%
18−20
−250%
Metro Exodus 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+250%
18−20
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63
+250%
18−20
−250%
Valorant 130−140
+230%
40−45
−230%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+238%
21−24
−238%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+244%
9−10
−244%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Dota 2 113
+223%
35−40
−223%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+256%
16−18
−256%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+229%
21−24
−229%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+229%
14−16
−229%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+250%
18−20
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+230%
10−11
−230%
Valorant 130−140
+230%
40−45
−230%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+241%
27−30
−241%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+251%
35−40
−251%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+228%
50−55
−228%
Valorant 160−170
+232%
50−55
−232%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+243%
14−16
−243%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+270%
10−11
−270%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+250%
12−14
−250%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+238%
8−9
−238%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+280%
10−11
−280%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Valorant 90−95
+248%
27−30
−248%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Dota 2 46
+229%
14−16
−229%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%

This is how T2000 Max-Q and UHD Graphics compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Max-Q is 256% faster in 1080p
  • T2000 Max-Q is 225% faster in 1440p
  • T2000 Max-Q is 280% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.73 5.53
Recency 27 May 2019 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 12 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 10 Watt

T2000 Max-Q has a 220.6% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 20% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T2000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T2000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation card while UHD Graphics 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 T2000 Max-Q
Quadro T2000 Max-Q
Intel UHD Graphics
UHD Graphics

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 75 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 7200 votes

Rate UHD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro T2000 Max-Q or UHD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.