Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon HD 6850

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6850 with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

HD 6850
2010
1 GB GDDR5, 127 Watt
5.11

T2000 Mobile outperforms HD 6850 by a whopping 306% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking628269
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.04no data
Power efficiency2.7823.88
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameBartsTU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date21 October 2010 (14 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores9601024
Core clock speedno data1575 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistors1,700 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)127 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate37.20114.2
Floating-point processing power1.488 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs4864

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportAGPno data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length198 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s128.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1112 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.5
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-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.

HD 6850 5.11
T2000 Mobile 20.77
+306%

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.

HD 6850 1963
T2000 Mobile 7985
+307%

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

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Elden Ring 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Elden Ring 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
World of Tanks 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Elden Ring 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
World of Tanks 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Elden Ring 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.11 20.77
Recency 21 October 2010 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 127 Watt 60 Watt

T2000 Mobile has a 306.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 111.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6850 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6850 is a desktop card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


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

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.


AMD Radeon HD 6850
Radeon HD 6850
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

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.


4 574 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 398 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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