Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon R6 (Mullins)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
R6 (Carrizo) R6 (Kaveri) R6 (Mullins) R6 M255DX R6 M335DX R6 M340DX R6 M435DX R6 Mobile Graphics
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
T400 Mobile T500 Mobile T600 Mobile T1000 Mobile T1000 Max-Q T1200 Max-Q T1200 Mobile T2000 Mobile T2000 Max-Q T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R6 (Mullins) with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R6 (Mullins)
2014
0.59

T2000 Mobile outperforms R6 (Mullins) by a whopping 3136% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
R6 (Mullins) R6 (Mullins)
T2000 Mobile T2000 Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1270321
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data24.50
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameMullinsTU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date29 April 2014 (12 years ago)27 May 2019 (6 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 cores1281024
Core clock speed500 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1785 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data60 Watt
Texture fill rateno data114.2
Floating-point processing powerno data3.656 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data64
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cacheno data1024 KB

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
Interfaceno dataPCIe 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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Far Cry 5 0−1 60−65
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1480%
75−80
+1480%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−825%
70−75
+825%
Valorant 27−30
−421%
140−150
+421%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−1194%
230−240
+1194%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Dota 2 12−14
−817%
110−120
+817%
Far Cry 5 0−1 60−65
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1480%
75−80
+1480%
Metro Exodus 0−1 40−45
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−825%
70−75
+825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Valorant 27−30
−421%
140−150
+421%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Dota 2 12−14
−817%
110−120
+817%
Far Cry 5 0−1 60−65
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1480%
75−80
+1480%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−825%
70−75
+825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Valorant 27−30
−421%
140−150
+421%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4
−4600%
140−150
+4600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2750%
170−180
+2750%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2350%
45−50
+2350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1400%
30−33
+1400%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−4400%
45−50
+4400%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−157%
35−40
+157%
Valorant 3−4
−3600%
110−120
+3600%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−900%
20−22
+900%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−900%
20−22
+900%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 4600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile performs better in 28 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 28 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.59 19.09
Recency 29 April 2014 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm

T2000 Mobile has a 3136% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 133% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R6 (Mullins) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R6 (Mullins) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

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

R6 (Mullins) Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
T2000 Mobile Quadro T2000 Mobile
vs
Quadro M5500 Quadro M5500
R6 (Mullins) Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
HD 6450M Radeon HD 6450M
HD 8280 AMD Radeon HD 8280
vs
Tesla S1070 Tesla S1070
HD 8280 AMD Radeon HD 8280
vs
A100 SXM4 40 GB SXM4 40 GB
HD 8280 AMD Radeon HD 8280
vs
RTX 5070 Mobile RTX 5070 Mobile
R6 (Mullins) AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
7050 SE + nForce 630a GeForce 7050 SE + nForce 630a
R6 (Mullins) AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
GeForce 6150 GeForce 6150
R6 (Mullins) AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
RX 6650M XT RX 6650M XT
R6 (Mullins) AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
RTX 5090 RTX 5090
R6 (Mullins) AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
vs
Graphics 3-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) 3 Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
HD 8240 AMD Radeon HD 8240
vs
315 OEM GeForce 315 OEM
HD 8240 AMD Radeon HD 8240
vs
FX Go5200 32M FX Go5200 32M

Community ratings

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon R6 (Mullins) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 509 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R6 (Mullins) or Quadro T2000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.