Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated263
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data23.85
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRavenTU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date23 April 2018 (6 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores3841024
Core clock speed300 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1011 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate24.26114.2
Floating-point processing power0.7764 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2464

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
InterfaceIGPPCIe 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 April 2018 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 60 Watt

Vega 6 Mobile Efficient has 300% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient and Quadro T2000 Mobile. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient 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 Vega 6 Mobile Efficient
Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

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.


3.3 4 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 381 vote

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.