So sánh card nvidia 2000m và gtx
|
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. Show
Pipelines / CUDA cores640192CUDA cores640no dataCore clock speed1096 MHz550 MHzBoost clock speed1202 MHzno dataNumber of transistors1,870 million1,170 millionManufacturing process technology28 nm40 nmPower consumption (TDP)75 Watt55 WattTexture fill rate47.0417.60Floating-point performance1,505 gflops422.4 gflops Size and compatibilityInformation on GeForce GTX 960M and Quadro 2000M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 sizemedium sizedmedium sizedBus supportPCI Express 3.0no dataInterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)SLI options+no data MemoryParameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM. Memory typeGDDR5DDR3Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GBMemory bus width128 Bit128 BitMemory clock speed2500 MHz900 MHzMemory bandwidth80 GB/s28.8 GB/sShared memory-- Video outputs and portsTypes 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 outputsVGA аnalog display support+no dataDisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no dataHDMI+no data TechnologiesSupported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes. GameStream+no dataGeForce ShadowPlay+no dataGPU Boost2.0no dataGameWorks+no dataH.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no dataOptimus+no dataBatteryBoost+no dataAnsel+no data API supportList of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions. DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)Shader Model5.15.1OpenGL4.54.6OpenCL1.21.1Vulkan1.1.126N/ACUDA+2.1 Synthetic benchmark performanceNon-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale. Combined synthetic benchmark scoreThis 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. GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 2000M by 334% in our combined benchmark results. PassmarkThis is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various 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% GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 2000M by 334% in Passmark. 3DMark 11 Performance GPU3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy. Benchmark coverage: 16% GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 2000M by 319% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU. GeekBench 5 OpenCLGeekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group. Benchmark coverage: 9% GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 2000M by 215% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL. Octane Render OctaneBenchThis is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists. Benchmark coverage: 4% GeForce GTX 960M outperforms Quadro 2000M by 357% in Octane Render OctaneBench. Mining hashratesCryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce GTX 960M and Quadro 2000M. Usually measured in megahashes per second. Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 175 Mh/s 27 Mh/s Gaming performanceLet's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS. Average FPS across all PC gamesHere are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions: 900p95 +352% 21−24 −352% Full HD36 −5.6% 38 +5.6% 1440p15 +400% 3−4 −400% 4K13 +550% 2−3 −550% Performance in popular gamesFull HD Low Preset Cyberpunk 207714−16 5−6 Full HD Medium Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey25 +2400% 1−2 −2400% Assassin's Creed Valhalla12−14 +500% 2−3 −500% Battlefield 538 +1167% 3−4 −1167% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare24−27 +118% 10−12 −118% Cyberpunk 207714−16 +180% 5−6 −180% Far Cry 528 +1300% 2−3 −1300% Far Cry New Dawn27 +2600% 1−2 −2600% Forza Horizon 435 +600% 5−6 −600% Hitman 321−24 +633% 3−4 −633% Horizon Zero Dawn18−20 +500% 3−4 −500% Red Dead Redemption 214−16 +200% 5−6 −200% Shadow of the Tomb Raider24 +200% 8−9 −200% Watch Dogs: Legion14−16 +400% 3−4 −400% Full HD High Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey19 +1800% 1−2 −1800% Assassin's Creed Valhalla12−14 +500% 2−3 −500% Battlefield 531 +933% 3−4 −933% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare24−27 +118% 10−12 −118% Cyberpunk 207714−16 +180% 5−6 −180% Far Cry 525 +1150% 2−3 −1150% Far Cry New Dawn25 +2400% 1−2 −2400% Forza Horizon 431 +520% 5−6 −520% Hitman 321−24 +633% 3−4 −633% Horizon Zero Dawn18−20 +500% 3−4 −500% Metro Exodus12 +300% 3−4 −300% Red Dead Redemption 214−16 +200% 5−6 −200% Shadow of the Tomb Raider19 +138% 8−9 −138% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt24 +380% 5−6 −380% Watch Dogs: Legion14−16 +400% 3−4 −400% Full HD Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey11 +1000% 1−2 −1000% Assassin's Creed Valhalla12−14 +500% 2−3 −500% Battlefield 526 +767% 3−4 −767% Cyberpunk 207714−16 +180% 5−6 −180% Far Cry 523 +1050% 2−3 −1050% Far Cry New Dawn23 +2200% 1−2 −2200% Forza Horizon 425 +400% 5−6 −400% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt14 +180% 5−6 −180% Watch Dogs: Legion14−16 +400% 3−4 −400% 1440p High Preset Call of Duty: Modern Warfare12−14 +225% 4−5 −225% Hitman 314−16 +180% 5−6 −180% Horizon Zero Dawn14−16 +75% 8−9 −75% Metro Exodus8−9 +167% 3−4 −167% Red Dead Redemption 26−7 +500% 1−2 −500% Shadow of the Tomb Raider11 +83.3% 6−7 −83.3% 1440p Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey8 +700% 1−2 −700% Assassin's Creed Valhalla3−4 0−1 Battlefield 517 +467% 3−4 −467% Cyberpunk 20774−5 +300% 1−2 −300% Far Cry 515 +275% 4−5 −275% Far Cry New Dawn15 +400% 3−4 −400% Forza Horizon 418 +1700% 1−2 −1700% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt7−8 +40% 5−6 −40% Watch Dogs: Legion4−5 0−1 4K High Preset Call of Duty: Modern Warfare6−7 +200% 2−3 −200% Hitman 38−9 +300% 2−3 −300% Horizon Zero Dawn8−9 +14.3% 7−8 −14.3% Metro Exodus3−4 0−1 Red Dead Redemption 25−6 +400% 1−2 −400% Shadow of the Tomb Raider4−5 0−1 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt10 +400% 2−3 −400% 4K Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey4−5 0−1 Assassin's Creed Valhalla3−4 0−1 Battlefield 53 0−1 Cyberpunk 20771−2 0−1 Far Cry 57 +40% 5−6 −40% Far Cry New Dawn6 −16.7% 7−8 +16.7% Forza Horizon 410−12 +1000% 1−2 −1000% Watch Dogs: Legion3−4 0−1 This is how GTX 960M and Quadro 2000M compete in popular games: 900p resolution:
1080p resolution:
1440p resolution:
4K resolution:
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
All in all, in popular games:
Advantages and disadvantagesPerformance score 8.73 2.01 Recency 12 March 2015 22 February 2011 Pipelines / CUDA cores 640 192 Memory bandwidth 80 28.8 Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 55 Watt The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 2000M in performance tests. Be aware that GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro 2000M 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. Cast your own voteDo you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card. GeForce GTX 960M Quadro 2000M Similar GPU comparisonsWe selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider. User ratings: view and submitHere you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself. Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M on a scale of 1 to 5: Rate NVIDIA Quadro 2000M on a scale of 1 to 5: Questions and commentsHere you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch. |
