NVIDIA Quadro K2000D vs NVIDIA Quadro CX
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 2GB VRAM Quadro K2000D and 1536MB VRAM Quadro CX to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro K2000D 's Advantages
Released 4 years and 4 months late
More VRAM (2GB vs 1536GB)
192 additional rendering cores
Lower TDP (51W vs 150W)
NVIDIA Quadro CX 's Advantages
Larger VRAM bandwidth (76.80GB/s vs 64.00GB/s)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro K2000D
+58%
0.733 TFLOPS
Quadro CX
0.462 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Mar 2013
Release Date
Nov 2008
Quadro
Generation
Quadro CX
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
1000 MHz
Memory Clock
800 MHz
Memory
2GB
Memory Size
1536MB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR3
128bit
Memory Bus
384bit
64.00GB/s
Bandwidth
76.80GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
SM Count
24
384
Shading Units
192
32
TMUs
64
16
ROPs
24
-
-
-
-
-
-
16 KB (per SMX)
L1 Cache
-
256 KB
L2 Cache
192 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
7.632 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
14.45 GPixel/s
30.53 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
38.53 GTexel/s
-
-
-
732.7 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
462.3 GFLOPS
30.53 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
57.79 GFLOPS
Board Design
51W
TDP
150W
250 W
Suggested PSU
450 W
2x DVI
1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2
Outputs
1x DVI
2x DisplayPort
1x S-Video
None
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin
Graphics Processor
GK107
GPU Name
GT200B
GK107-301-A2
GPU Variant
-
Kepler
Architecture
Tesla 2.0
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
55 nm
1.27 billion
Transistors
1.4 billion
118 mm²
Die Size
470 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_0)
DirectX
11.1 (10_0)
4.6
OpenGL
3.3
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.1
Vulkan
N/A
3.0
CUDA
1.3
5.1
Shader Model
4.0
