Quadro M2000 vs Radeon RX Vega 56

Place in performance ranking	141	407
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	26.66	4.27
Architecture	Vega (2017−2021)	Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019)
GPU code name	Vega	GM206
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	14 August 2017 (6 years ago)	8 April 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	$437.75
Current price	$224 (0.6x MSRP)	$285 (0.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX Vega 56 has 524% better value for money than Quadro M2000.

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 cores	3584	768
Core clock speed	1138 MHz	796 MHz
Boost clock speed	1474 MHz	1163 MHz
Number of transistors	12,500 million	2,940 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	329.5	55.82
Floating-point performance	10,566 gflops	1,812 gflops

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	201 mm
Width	2-slot	1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectors	2x 8-pin	None

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 type	HBM2	128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	409.6 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	6612 MHz
Memory bandwidth	409.6 GB/s	Up 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	DP DP DP DP
Number of simultaneous displays	no data	4
HDMI	+	no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro	no data	+
Mosaic	no data	+
nView Desktop Management	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.4	5
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.125	+
CUDA	no data	5.2

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.

RX Vega 56 34.33
+233%

Quadro M2000 10.31

Radeon RX Vega 56 outperforms Quadro M2000 by 233% 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%

RX Vega 56 13265
+233%

Quadro M2000 3983

Radeon RX Vega 56 outperforms Quadro M2000 by 233% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	115 +283%	30−35 −283%
1440p	70 +233%	21−24 −233%
4K	51 +264%	14−16 −264%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

55−60
+269%

16−18

−269%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	77 +267%	21−24 −267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	60−65 +233%	18−20 −233%
Battlefield 5	164 +264%	45−50 −264%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70−75 +233%	21−24 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +269%	16−18 −269%
Far Cry 5	115 +283%	30−33 −283%
Far Cry New Dawn	114 +280%	30−33 −280%
Forza Horizon 4	141 +253%	40−45 −253%
Hitman 3	70−75 +238%	21−24 −238%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +245%	40−45 −245%
Metro Exodus	144 +260%	40−45 −260%
Red Dead Redemption 2	85−90 +258%	24−27 −258%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	120−130 +269%	35−40 −269%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +267%	24−27 −267%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	70 +233%	21−24 −233%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	60−65 +233%	18−20 −233%
Battlefield 5	153 +240%	45−50 −240%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70−75 +233%	21−24 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +269%	16−18 −269%
Far Cry 5	92 +241%	27−30 −241%
Far Cry New Dawn	88 +267%	24−27 −267%
Forza Horizon 4	272 +240%	80−85 −240%
Hitman 3	70−75 +238%	21−24 −238%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +245%	40−45 −245%
Metro Exodus	106 +253%	30−33 −253%
Red Dead Redemption 2	85−90 +258%	24−27 −258%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	120−130 +269%	35−40 −269%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	124 +254%	35−40 −254%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +267%	24−27 −267%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	52 +271%	14−16 −271%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	60−65 +233%	18−20 −233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70−75 +233%	21−24 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	55−60 +269%	16−18 −269%
Far Cry 5	69 +283%	18−20 −283%
Forza Horizon 4	109 +263%	30−33 −263%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +245%	40−45 −245%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	120−130 +269%	35−40 −269%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	74 +252%	21−24 −252%
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +267%	24−27 −267%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

85−90
+258%

24−27

−258%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	98 +263%	27−30 −263%
Far Cry New Dawn	84 +250%	24−27 −250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	44 +267%	12−14 −267%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +270%	10−11 −270%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +264%	14−16 −264%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +257%	7−8 −257%
Far Cry 5	74 +252%	21−24 −252%
Forza Horizon 4	88 +267%	24−27 −267%
Hitman 3	40−45 +258%	12−14 −258%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +248%	21−24 −248%
Metro Exodus	74 +252%	21−24 −252%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85 +238%	24−27 −238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +236%	14−16 −236%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 +263%	8−9 −263%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+269%

16−18

−269%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	46 +283%	12−14 −283%
Far Cry New Dawn	32 +256%	9−10 −256%
Hitman 3	27−30 +250%	8−9 −250%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +250%	12−14 −250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	31 +244%	9−10 −244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +267%	12−14 −267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27 +238%	8−9 −238%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +267%	3−4 −267%
Far Cry 5	23 +283%	6−7 −283%
Forza Horizon 4	59 +269%	16−18 −269%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +250%	12−14 −250%
Metro Exodus	42 +250%	12−14 −250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−33

+233%

9−10
−233%

This is how RX Vega 56 and Quadro M2000 compete in popular games:

RX Vega 56 is 283% faster in 1080p
RX Vega 56 is 233% faster in 1440p
RX Vega 56 is 264% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	34.33	10.31
Recency	14 August 2017	8 April 2016
Cost	$399	$437.75
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	75 Watt