NVIDIA Quadro K2000M vs NVIDIA Quadro K5000 SYNC
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 2GB VRAM Quadro K2000M and 4GB VRAM Quadro K5000 SYNC to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro K2000M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (55W vs 122W)
NVIDIA Quadro K5000 SYNC 's Advantages
Released 7 months late
More VRAM (4GB vs 2GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (172.8GB/s vs 28.80GB/s)
1152 additional rendering cores
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro K2000M
0.572 TFLOPS
Quadro K5000 SYNC
+279%
2.169 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jun 2012
Release Date
Jan 2013
Quadro Mobile
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
MXM-A (3.0)
Bus Interface
PCIe 2.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
-
-
-
-
-
900 MHz
Memory Clock
1350 MHz
Memory
2GB
Memory Size
4GB
DDR3
Memory Type
GDDR5
128bit
Memory Bus
256bit
28.80GB/s
Bandwidth
172.8GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
-
-
384
Shading Units
1536
32
TMUs
128
16
ROPs
32
-
-
-
-
-
-
16 KB (per SMX)
L1 Cache
16 KB (per SMX)
256 KB
L2 Cache
512 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
5.960 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
22.59 GPixel/s
23.84 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
90.37 GTexel/s
-
-
-
572.2 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
2.169 TFLOPS
23.84 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
90.37 GFLOPS
Board Design
55W
TDP
122W
-
Suggested PSU
300 W
No outputs
Outputs
2x DVI
2x DisplayPort 1.2
1x SDI
-
Power Connectors
2x 6-pin
Graphics Processor
GK107
GPU Name
GK104
N14P-Q3-A2
GPU Variant
-
Kepler
Architecture
Kepler
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
28 nm
1.27 billion
Transistors
3.54 billion
118 mm²
Die Size
294 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_0)
DirectX
12 (11_0)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.1
Vulkan
1.1
3.0
CUDA
3.0
5.1
Shader Model
5.1
