Quadro FX 2000 vs Radeon RX Vega 5

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking644not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.48no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameVegaNV30
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)21 January 2003 (21 year 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 cores320no data
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed1400 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data125 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rateno data3.200
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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).

Interfaceno dataAGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x Molex

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 dataDDR2
Maximum RAM amountno data128 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 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 data2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_19.0a
OpenGLno data1.5 (2.1)
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 January 2020 21 January 2003
Chip lithography 7 nm 130 nm

RX Vega 5 has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1757.1% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 5 and Quadro FX 2000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 5 is a notebook card while Quadro FX 2000 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 RX Vega 5
Radeon RX Vega 5
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2000
Quadro FX 2000

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.


4 212 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 5 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 3 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2000 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.