Arc A550M vs Quadro T2000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro T2000 Mobile with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

T2000 Mobile
2019
4 GB GDDR5, 60 Watt
20.65

Arc A550M outperforms T2000 Mobile by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking276231
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency23.7528.23
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameTU117DG2-512
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)2022 (3 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 cores10242048
Core clock speed1575 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1785 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate114.2262.4
Floating-point processing power3.656 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs64128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 x16PCIe 4.0 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s224.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.5-
DLSS-+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
−21.2%
60−65
+21.2%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
−21.2%
60−65
+21.2%
Battlefield 5 80−85
−13.6%
90−95
+13.6%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−18.2%
75−80
+18.2%
Fortnite 100−110
−13.7%
110−120
+13.7%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−16.5%
90−95
+16.5%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
−22.2%
65−70
+22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−21.6%
90−95
+21.6%
Valorant 140−150
−11%
160−170
+11%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
−21.2%
60−65
+21.2%
Battlefield 5 80−85
−13.6%
90−95
+13.6%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
−8.6%
250−260
+8.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Dota 2 110−120
−9.1%
120−130
+9.1%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−18.2%
75−80
+18.2%
Fortnite 100−110
−13.7%
110−120
+13.7%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−16.5%
90−95
+16.5%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
−22.2%
65−70
+22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
−16.4%
85−90
+16.4%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−21.4%
50−55
+21.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−21.6%
90−95
+21.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−25.5%
65−70
+25.5%
Valorant 140−150
−11%
160−170
+11%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
−13.6%
90−95
+13.6%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Dota 2 110−120
−9.1%
120−130
+9.1%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−18.2%
75−80
+18.2%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−16.5%
90−95
+16.5%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
−22.2%
65−70
+22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
−21.6%
90−95
+21.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−25.5%
65−70
+25.5%
Valorant 140−150
−11%
160−170
+11%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 100−110
−13.7%
110−120
+13.7%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
−17.1%
160−170
+17.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−23.5%
40−45
+23.5%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−24%
30−35
+24%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−1.7%
170−180
+1.7%
Valorant 180−190
−10.4%
200−210
+10.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−18.2%
65−70
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−27.8%
21−24
+27.8%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−20.5%
50−55
+20.5%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−20.4%
55−60
+20.4%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−17.1%
40−45
+17.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
−22.2%
55−60
+22.2%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
−22.9%
40−45
+22.9%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−21.4%
30−35
+21.4%
Valorant 110−120
−20.7%
130−140
+20.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Dota 2 65−70
−13.4%
75−80
+13.4%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−23.8%
24−27
+23.8%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−20.6%
40−45
+20.6%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
−22.2%
21−24
+22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22
−25%
24−27
+25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A550M is 28% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Arc A550M is ahead in 66 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.65 24.55
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 6 nm

Arc A550M has a 18.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Arc A550M 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 Mobile
Quadro T2000
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M

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.


3.7 402 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 81 vote

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro T2000 Mobile or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.