Quadro M2000 vs Radeon R9 M390X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

R9 M390X
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
9.31

Quadro M2000 outperforms Radeon R9 M390X by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking441407
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.28
ArchitectureGCN 3 (2014−2016)Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)
GPU code nameAmethyst (XT) / TongaGM206
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date9 June 2015 (9 years ago)8 April 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$437.75
Current priceno data$285 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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 cores2048768
Core clock speed723 MHz796 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1163 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2,940 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate92.5455.82
Floating-point performance2,961 gflops1,812 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R9 M390X and Quadro M2000 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data201 mm
Widthno data1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data6612 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/sUp to 106 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputsDP DP DP DP
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4
Eyefinity1no data

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D+no data
PowerTune+no data
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio-no data
ZeroCore+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212
Shader Model6.35
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan++
Mantle+no data
CUDAno data5.2

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.

R9 M390X 9.31
Quadro M2000 10.32
+10.8%

Quadro M2000 outperforms Radeon R9 M390X by 11% based on our aggregate 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%

R9 M390X 3597
Quadro M2000 3984
+10.8%

Quadro M2000 outperforms Radeon R9 M390X by 11% in Passmark.

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

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−7.1%
30−33
+7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−3.4%
30−33
+3.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−2.9%
35−40
+2.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Hitman 3 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.31 10.32
Recency 9 June 2015 8 April 2016
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 75 Watt

The Quadro M2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M390X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M390X is a notebook card while Quadro M2000 is a 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 R9 M390X
Radeon R9 M390X
NVIDIA Quadro M2000
Quadro M2000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


5 2 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M390X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 195 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 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.